Skip to main content

Full text of "Assertio septem sacramentorium, or, defence of the seven sacraments"

See other formats



Septem Sacramentorum 




U)n 1 ., Iking of Jn0lanfc 







Archbishop of Baltimore 




VUbil bstat. 


Censor Librorum. 



Archbishop of New York. 

NEW YORK, December 27, 1907. 
















FOREWORD ... 15 



" ASSERTIO . . . 40 







BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 136 


INDEX 464 


THE "Assertio Septem Sacramentorum," or "Do- 
fence of the Seven Sacraments," by Henry VIII., King 
of England, and "Defender of the Faith," here re- 
edited by Rev. Louis O Donovan, is a rare, royal, 
Catholic book. It is rare, inasmuch as it has probably 
been printed but twice in nearly 200 years, and so no 
wonder that lately a copy of the work was listed for sale 
at $25.00. It is a royal book, by reason of its kingly 
author, whose claim is shown to be, if not certain, at 
least very probable. It is Catholic, because no Catho 
lic could write a more orthodox treatise on the subjects 
here explained by King Henry VIII. Yet he expounds 
such crucial dogmas as the primacy of the Bishop of 
Rome, indulgences, the mystery of the Real Presence 
and the Mass, the Sacrament of Confession, divorce, 
etc. And all this he has unfolded in as Catholic a man 
ner as St. Thomas, or St. Francis de Sales, or St. Al- 
phonsus Liguori could have done. 

But besides the matter of the treatise, the period also 
when it was composed a most interesting, even if sad 
dening, epoch in the history of the Church makes the 
work most valuable. For just at that date 1521 
the cauldron of the so-called Reformation was boiling 
furiously in Germany. But in England, Henry 
boasted that its horrors had not yet begun, and, more 
over, he posed as the champion of the Church, to see 
that Luther s novelties should not appear there. And 
this freedom from the "reform" he was ready to main 
tain by his sword if later need be, but at any rate now 

10 Preface 

by his pen. And Henry was quite well equipped for 
his self-assumed task, having improved his natural tal 
ents by an education intended to prepare him to be 
Archbishop of Canterbury. Little wonder then that he 
should have written such a book as the "Defence of the 
Seven Sacraments/ which, after all, is only a simple, 
plain, yet strong explanation of the Church s teachings 
on some of her most vital points. 

As the originator of what was in its origin a schis- 
matical rather than an heretical church (however 
much later on heresies developed within it), and as the 
first head of that church, Henry is of special interest 
to the student of religions and of Church history. In 
act the first, Henry is a young, brilliant, powerful, 
Catholic king with the best of Catholic women for his 
queen, ruling in peace over Catholic, Merry England. 
In act the second, he has become the adulterer, the 
divorce, the wife-killer, and with it all, and because of 
it all, he has become a schismatic, the head of a schism, 
dragging his subjects away from Catholic unity, and 
making them acknowledge himself not only their 
earthly king, but their spiritual head. And yet it was 
only a few years before that Henry had written this 
book, for which Pope Leo X. had given him the title 
"Defender of the Faith," a title prized and used by 
every subsequent sovereign of England, down to Ed 
ward VII. to-day. 

In his exhaustive Introduction to Henry s work, Fr. 
O Donovan has quoted the views of many different 
writers bearing on the occasion, origin and motive, the 
authorship, the editions and versions, the presentation 
of the book to the Pope, and the question whether or not 
the title "Defender of the Faith" was intended to be 
hereditary. Keferences to the places in the various 
originals from which he quotes are copiously given. 

Preface 11 

The bibliography of over a hundred works gives the au 
thors, editions, date and place of publication of the 
works used. 

This book, therefore, from so many points of view, is 
one that must be of interest to every student of either 
English history or of the history of religion in general. 
The presence of the original Latin text and somewhat 
old English version, together with the complementary 
documents, should appeal to and reach many readers, 
not only in this country but especially in England. 

In England many solid works on the Reformation 
period have lately appeared, and I hope that the move 
ment will inspire our American scholars. Books on 
this period of history have, in the past, been unduly 
biassed, but a refreshing change for the better is notice 
able in recent years. Such a work as the present, giv 
ing the original texts of the authors who have a right 
to be admitted as reliable witnesses, is a sign of the 
times, for Fr. O Donovan here brings before you King 
Henry and a hundred critics and lets them speak for 
themselves in their own words. He has endeavored to 
place before the reader the original documents in the 
case, and then allow him to draw his own conclusion. 
He goes to the root of the matter of contention between 
Catholics and members of the Church of England, 
showing in Henry s own words that he who later be 
came the first head of the Protestant Church in Eng 
land was, together with all the people of England in 
those olden days, truly Catholic and violently opposed 
to Luther and his destructive and murderous reform. 

I hope, therefore, that the work may be widely and 
carefully read, especially in this country, but indeed 
also in England, the land of its birth. 



the EMtor 


THE Eenaissance in Italy, the heart of Christendom, 
sent something of a pulse even as far as that member 
of the body of Europe called England. For there such 
men as More, Fisher, Colet, Lilly, Linacre, and 
Grocyn lived, studied, and taught. Erasmus speaks 
most flatteringly of King Henry VIII., surrounded by 
a chosen, able coterie of savants and litterateurs, the 
modern Maecenas, who himself contended for and won 
his laurels and that from the hands of the cultured 
Pope Leo X. in reward for the royal literary feat, the 
"Assertio Septem Sacramentorum," i. e., the "Defence 
of the Seven Sacraments. 

"The evil that men do lives after them ; the good is 
oft interred with their bones. So let it" not be with 
Henry. Generally he is remembered as one who 
"spared neither man in his hate, nor woman in his 
lust."* But this is the roue, the non-Catholic, the Protest 
ant, the schismatic Henry. Let us not forget that at least 
once he had been the beau-ideal Henry; in body, tall, 
straight, broad-shouldered, a master of every gentle 
manly accomplishment ; in mind naturally clever, an 
accomplished linguist, a learned theologian, a faithful 
son of the Church. As such he wrote his famous book, 
the "Defence of the Seven Sacraments." In reprint 
ing this work several topics of interest seemed to need 
notice and explanation, and these have grown and 
shaped themselves into an Introduction grouped under 
the following heads: 

* Carwithen s Hist, of the Church of England, I., p. 38. 

16 Foreword 

1. A Synopsis of the "Assertio." 

2. Its Occasion, Origin and Motive. 

3. Its Authorship. 

4. The Various Editions and Versions. 

5. The Presentation of it to the Pope. 

6. Was the Title "Defender of the Faith" Heredi 
tary \ 

7. Criticism and Influence of the "Assertio." 

8. Bibliography. 

Following this Introduction comes the "Assertio" 
proper, preceded by a few documents reprinted in Eng 
lish, some of them in the Latin too, in the following 
order : 

1. The Introduction to the English version here re 
printed, in English only. 

2. Henry s Letter to Leo, in English and Latin. 

3. The Oration of John Clark, in English only. 

4. Leo X. s Reply, in English only. 

5. Leo X. s Bull, in English and Latin. 

6. Leo X. s Letter to Henry, in English and Latin. 

7. Henry s Dedicatory Epistle, in English and Latin. 

8. Henry s "To the Reader," in English and Latin. 

9. Henry s Two Preliminary Chapters, on Indul 
gences and the Papacy, respectively, in English and 

10. Henry s "Assertio Septem Sacramentorum," 
or "Defence of the Seven Sacraments," in English and 

11. The Index to the "Assertio," in English and 

The first reason for reprinting this work is a moral 
one namely, that the readers may see, from so illus 
trious an example, that loss of faith comes from loss of 
morals. The second reason is that non-Catholics, those 

Foreword 17 

"other sheep which are not of this fold," may return to 
the rich, green pastures which they left four hundred 
years ago, and which are still as rich, as green, because 
still watered by the perennial streams of the seven sac 
raments, just as in the days of Henry; they are "ever 
ancient, yet ever new." 

The editor regrets that this piece of work has been 
made much after the manner of the good housewife s 
rag carpet composed of pieces and patches, at differ 
ent times and places, when and where a busy ministry 
would permit. There is no pretence at style. Indeed, 
while trying to be brief, and yet give all the testimonies 
collected, the matter has, it is feared, often grown 
heavy; while trying to teach one is apt to forget to 
amuse. All that the editor asks is a careful reading 
and indulgence for his defects. 

The writer takes pleasure in acknowledging his in 
debtedness to the nch treasures of the Library of the 
Peabody Institute of Baltimore; the kind loan of one 
edition of the "Assertio" from the Catholic University 
of America; also Dr. Healy s old English version of 
the "Assertio," here reprinted; above all, the encour 
aging interest and learned advice of that richly gifted 
historian that gentle, hard-working teacher - - Very 
Reverend Thomas J. Shahan, S.T.D., Professor of 
Ecclesiastical History in the Catholic University of 
America. To the Rev. Lucian Johnston, S.T.L., of 
Baltimore, the writer is grateful for helpful criticism 
and advice; also to the Rev. Charles Hogue, S.S., of 
St. Charles College, Maryland; to Rev. Henry J. 
Shandelle, S.J., of Georgetown, and Rev. Fr. Ehrle, 
S.J., of Rome. And though last, not least, most pro 
foundly does the writer appreciate the graciousness of 
that providential modern defender of the FAITH OF 

18 Foreword 

OUR FATHERS, who has been good enough in his busy, 
latter days to introduce this book His Eminence 
James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore. 


Synopsis of tbe "Hssertio" 

THIS Synopsis of the "Assertio" sums up the gist of 
the English version reprinted further on in extenso. 

And first comes the rather quaint "Advertisement/ 7 
bespeaking the merits of this English version. It is as 
follows : 



ALL readers of English history know that Luther 
started and Henry established "those fatal confusions, 
animosities and devastations ... in these three 

Wealth, sloth, looseness of morals, ignorance made 
a reformation of the manners of some of the clergy de 
sirable. Luther s first intention to reform abuses of 
churchmen was good, but later he set himself above the 
whole Church to reform religion itself. The German 
princes helped Luther with arms, and Catholics re 
pelled force by force. Henry "had well studied philos 
ophy and theology," but his style is abusive, imitating 
that of his adversaries. "Luther was inflamed by the 
censures of the University of Paris ;" still more by those 
of Henry. Henry was a "devout Roman Catholic" till 
the Pope refused him a divorce. However, "his De 
fence of the Seven Sacraments is a work of considera 
ble merit. Its orthodoxy we cannot doubt of. ... 

20 Synopsis of the "Assertio" 

The work . . . may not only be very profitably pe 
rused, but is also extremely curious, when we consider 
its author s very remarkable and inconsistent character. 
The London edition, from whence the present is taken, 
has been carefully corrected throughout, in the orthog 
raphy and punctuation, and the text, obscure in some 
parts, has been elucidated. . . . This edition is 
vastly preferable to all former ones in the English 
tongue. . . . The publication of a work, hitherto so 
extremely scarce, will be satisfactory to the curious." 


" letter of 1benr? 1D111. to Xeo 

n tbe Subject ot tbe Hssertto/ 1521. 
"Most Holy Father:" 

As We Catholic sovereigns should uphold religion, 
when We saw Luther s heresy running wild, for the 
sake of Germany, and still more for love of the Holy 
Apostolic See, We tried to weed out this heresy. 

"Seeing its widespread havoc, We called on all to 
help Us to eradicate it, particularly the Emperor and 
the Electoral Princes. Lest, however, this be not 
enough to show Our mind on Luther s wicked books, 
We shall defend and guard the Holy Roman Church 
not only by force of arms, but also by Our wits. And 
therefore We dedicate to Your Holiness Our first fruits, 
confident that an abundant harvest will be gathered, 
should Your Holiness approve Our work. 

"From Our Royal Palace at Greenwich, May 21st, 

"Your Holiness most devoted and humble son, 
Henry, by the grace of God King of England and 
France, and Lord of Ireland." 

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 21 


"ration of HDr* Jobn Clarft, 

Orator for Dents D1Tf fl., 1?fn0 of Englano, France ano 
Urelano, 2>efenDer of tbe ffaftb; on bt0 ejbilntfns 
tbf0 IRoBal JBoofe, in tbe ConetetotB at "Rome, to pope 

"Most Holy Father:" 

What great troubles from the Hussites ! What from 
Luther s works ! especially from " The Babylonian 
Captivity of the Church/ in refuting which many grave 
and learned men have diligently laboured." 

"Henry VIII., most affectionate son of Your Holi 
ness and of the sacred Eoman Church, hath written a 
book against this work of Luther s, which he has dedi 
cated to Your Holiness, . . . which I here present, but 
before You receive it, most holy Father, may it please 
You, that I speak somewhat of the devotion and venera 
tion of my King towards Your Holiness, and this most 
Holy See; as also of the other reasons which moved 
him to publish this work." . . . 

"Luther rends the seamless Coat of Christ, makes the 
Pope a mere priest, condemns all ministers, and calls 
Kome Babylon, makes the Pope a heretic and himself 
[Luther] equal to St. Peter. He burnt the decrees and 
statutes of the Fathers and published his Book of the 
Babylonian Captivity. It condemns Pope, hierarchy 
and the Kock and the Church; abolishes most sacred 
practices; institutes sacraments after his fancy, reduc 
ing them to three, if not to none at all. What ills are 
yet to be added to those started by the Hussites ? My 
King moved the Emperor to exile Luther. 

"My . . . England . . . hath never been behind in 
. . . due obedience to the Roman Church, either to 

22 Synopsis of the "Assertio" 

Spain, France, Germany or Italy ; nay, to Rome itself ; 
so no nation more impugns this monster. . . . King 
Henry, Your Holiness most devoted son, undertook 
this pious work himself/ . . . the most learned clergy 
of this realm have endeavoured to remove all doubts, "so 
that amongst us the Church of God is in great tran 
quillity; no differences, no disputes, no ambiguous 
words, murmurings or complaints are heard amongst 
the people." . . . 

"The reason that moved my most serene King," who 
has defended with the sword the Catholic Faith and 
Christian Religion, to undertake this work, is his 
piety: "his accustomed veneration to Your Holiness; 
Christian piety in the cause of God ; and a royal grief 
and indignation of seeing religion trodden under foot ;" 
also "the desire of glory" might have induced him "to 
discover by reason the Lutheran heresies. . . . This 
raging and mad dog is not to be dealt with by words, 
there being no hopes of his conversion, but with drawn 
swords, cannons, and other habiliments of war." And 
this "work of his, though it had the approbation of 
the most learned of his Kingdom; yet he resolved 
not to publish until Your Holiness (from whom we 
ought to receive the sense of the Gospel, by your quick 
and most sublime judgment) deem it worthy to pass 
through the hands of men. May therefore Your Holi 
ness take in good part and graciously accept this little 


Xeo /$ 1?epl? 

"NOTHING could have been sent more acceptable to 
Us." We praise and admire that most Christian King, 
having the knowledge, will, and ability of composing 

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 23 

this excellent book, who "has rendered himself no less 
admirable to the whole world by the eloquence of his 
style, than by his great wisdom." May the Creator 
bless him, and we shall do "anything that may tend to 
the honour and dignity of his Majesty and to his and 
his kingdom s glory." 

pope s Bull 

" fceo, I. JSi0bop ano Servant of tbe Servants of <3oD: Ho 
our most Dear Son in Cbrtet, Ibenrg, tbe Illustrious 
fcind of Jn0lano, ano Defender of tbe jfattb, eenoa 
Greeting, ano 0tve0 bi0 JSeneDiction." 

"As the other Roman Bishops have bestowed par 
ticular favours upon Catholic Princes" for constancy in 
Faith, and unspotted devotion to the Church in tem 
pestuous times: so also We, for your Majesty s most 
excellent works. "Our beloved son John Clark did, 
in Our Consistory, in presence of Our venerable 
Brethren, Cardinals of the Church, present Us a book 
which your Majesty . . . did compose as an antidote 
against the errors of divers heretics, often condemned 
by this Holy See, and now again revived by Martin 

"Having found in this book most admirable doctrine 
We thank God and beg you to enlist like workers. 
We, the true successor of St. Peter, presiding in this 
Holy See, from whence all dignity and titles have 
their source, have with our brethren maturely delib 
erated on these things ; and with one consent unani 
mously decreed to bestow on your Majesty this title, 
namely, Defender of the Faith/ ... We like 
wise command all Christians, that they name your 

24 Synopsis of the "Assertio" 

Majesty by this title. . . . Having thus weighed . . . 
your singular merits, we could not have invented a more 
congruous name. 

"And you shall rejoice in Our Lord, showing the 
way to others, that if they also covet to be invested with 
such a title, they may study to do such actions, and 
to follow the steps of your most excellent Majesty, 
whom, with your wife, children, and all who shall 
spring from you, we bless. 

"Given at St. Peter s in Rome, the fifth of the Ides 
of October ; in the year of Our Lord s Incarnation 1521, 
and in the ninth year of Our Papacy." 


"Xetter from %eo 

Go 1>enrB \Dfl1Tff. respecting tbe Bsaertio Septem Sacra* 
mentorunV in replB to tbe booh written bB tbe ftfna 
against Xutber. 

"To Our dearest Son in Christ health and Apostolic 

We are deeply grateful for your defence of this Holy 
See, and all but welcome Luther s crime as the occasion 
of Your noble championship. Such virtue must not 
lose its reward. For if praise is due to those who pro 
tect our liberty, as well as to those who defend our 
sacraments, both of these noble virtues are united in 

What return can We make for Your good will 
towards Us ? 

Your learning, cleverness and charity should con 
vince and gain back the heretics. 

For Your service "for the great God, and this Holy 
See, We give infinite thanks to Your Majesty, Defender 
of the Faith." 

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 25 

"In a bull of Our Own, with the assent of Our Vener 
able Brethren, We have forwarded to You this title of 
Defender of the Faith. " 

Forget not, dearest Son, to act in accordance with 
Your new and honourable title, remembering that far 
greater rewards, from Our Lord and Saviour, await 
You in heaven. Let Your defence of the Spouse of 
Christ here on earth remind You of, and prepare You 
for, an eternal reward hereafter. 


Gbe Epistle BeMcaton? 

Co Our fl&ost Dels Zoro Zeo I., cbfef JSiebop, fjenr^, Ittna 
of Bnglano, ffrance ano f relano, wisbetb perpetual 

"Most Holy Father:" 

You will wonder at a man of war and affairs writing 
against heresy, but love for the faith and respect for 
You urge me, and God s grace will aid me. "Keligion 
bears the greatest sway in the administration of public 
affairs and is likewise of no small importance in the 
commonwealth," . . . and so we have spent much time 
in the contemplation thereof, and now we "dedicate to 
Your Holiness what we have meditated therein. ... If 
we have erred in anything, we offer it to be corrected 
as may please Your Holiness." 


Go tbe IRea&er 

THOUGH of limited ability I feel it my duty to defend 
the Church and Catholic Faith to the best of my power. 
I arm myself with a twofold armour, celestial and ter- 

26 Synopsis of the "Assertio" 

restrial, to overcome him who perverts Scripture, the 
Sacraments, ecclesiastical rites and ceremonies the in 
fernal wolf, who tries to disperse the flock of Christ 
with his Babylonian Captivity. If Luther do not re 
pent and "if Christian princes do their duty these 
errors and himself, if he perseveres therein, may 
be burned in the fire." 


f flnbulgencea an& tbe pope s 

"Indulg entice sunt adulatorum Romanorum ne~ 

Luther attacks not only the abuses but the doctrine 
of indulgences : "they are nothing but mere impostures, 
fit only to destroy people s money and God s faith." 
. . . As he denies "indulgences to be profitable in this 
life, it would be in vain for me to dispute what great 
benefits the souls in Purgatory receive by them, . . . 
whereby we are relieved from Purgatory itself." . . . 
"The words of Christ remain firm: . . . Whatsoever 
thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven. By 
which words, if it is manifest that any priest has power 
to absolve men from sins, and take away eternal punish 
ment due thereunto, who will not judge it ridiculous, 
that the Prince of all priests should be denied the tak 
ing away of temporal punishment ?" 

"What concerns it me what that man admits, or 
denies, who alone rejects all things which the Holy 
Church has held during so many ages ?" 
* Luther s words, quoted by Henry. 

Synopsis of the "Asseriio" 27 


tbe pope s Butborits 

"Papatus est robusta Venatio Romani Pontificis.* 
"First, he [Luther] denied the Pope s supremacy 
to be of divine right, or law, but allowed it to be of hu 
man right. But now, (contrary to himself) he affirms 
it to be of neither of them. . . . He now embraces 
what he then detested. ... He preached that excom 
munication is a medicine and to be suffered with pa 
tience and obedience: he himself being (for every good 
cause) awhile after excommunicated, was so impatient 
of that sentence that (mad with rage) he breaks forth 
into insupportable contumelies, reproaches and blas 
phemies." . . . "He cannot deny that all the faithful 
honour and acknowledge the sacred Koman See for their 
mother and supreme." . . . "The Indies themselves 
... do submit to the See of Home. If the Bishop of 
Rome has got this large power, neither by command of 
God, nor the will of man, but by main force, I would 
fain know of Luther when the Pope rushed into the 
possession of so great riches. . . . By the unanimous 
consent of all nations, it is forbidden to change, or move 
the things which have been for a long time immovable. 
. . . Since the conversion of the world, all churches in 
the Christian world have been obedient to the See of 
Rome. . . . Though the Empire was translated to the 
Grecians, yet did they still own, and obey the su 
premacy of the Church, and See of Rome, except when 
they were in any turbulent schism. 

"St. Jerome . . . openly declared . . . that it was 
sufficient for him that the Pope of Rome did but ap 
prove his faith, whoever else should disapprove it. ? 
* Luther, quoted by Henry. 

28 Synopsis of the "Assertio" 

He is "endeavouring to draw all others with him into 
destruction, whilst he strives to dissuade them from 
their obedience to the Chief Bishop, whom, in a three 
fold manner, he himself is bound to obey, viz., as a 
Christian, as a priest, and as a religious brother. . . . 
Luther . . . refuses to submit to the law of God, but 
desires to establish a law of his own." 


Gbe Defence of tbe Seven Sacraments 

THE preceding two chapters of Luther are but a 
flourish to his real work. "Of seven Sacraments he 
leaves us but three ; ... of the three he takes away one 
immediately after in the same book, ... he says that 
if he would speak according to Scripture, he would have 
but one Sacrament and three sacramental signs. 


Gbe Sacrament of tbe Hltar 

"LET us begin where he began himself, with the 
adorable Sacrament of Christ s Body. The changing of 
the Name thereof, calling It the sacrament of bread, 
shows" Luther s intentions. As "St. Ambrose . . . 
says . . . Though the form of bread and wine is 
seen upon the altar, yet we must believe that there is 
nothing else but the Body and Blood of Christ. " Next 
comes the consubstantiation theory of Luther, who was 
determined with himself to draw the people to worship 
the bread and leave out Christ s Body. 

Luther reopened the old sore of the Bohemian trouble, 

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 29 

i. e., that the people should receive Communion under 
both forms. Luther s charge that the clergy forcibly 
took away the chalice from the laity against their will is 
disbelieved by Henry. If Luther objects to the change 
from the primitive way of giving Communion, he 
should object also to children not receiving at all, 
and to our receiving in the morning instead of after 
supper. And what authority in Scripture has he to 
put water in the wine, if not tradition ? The change is 
made by the Holy Ghost. "He that pretended to stand 
for the communicating under both kinds recommends 
the quite contrary, to wit, that it may be lawful for 
them never to receive under any kind." 

Luther also inculcates that "the substance of true 
bread and true wine remain still after Consecration." 

"He esteems this to be his greatest and chiefest argu 
ment, to wit, That Scripture is not to be forced, . . . 
but to be kept in the most simple signification that can 
be. . . . But/ says he, "the Divine Words are 
forced if that which Christ calls bread be taken for the 
accidents of bread, and what He calls wine for the form 
of wine. . . . The evangelists so plainly write that 
Christ took bread and blessed it. ... We confess 
He took bread and blessed it, but that He gave bread to 
His disciples, after He had made It His Body, we flatly 
deny, and the evangelists do not say He did." Luther 
says: "Take, eat, this, that is, this bread, (says He, 
which He had taken and broken) is My Body. . . . 
This is Luther s interpretation, but not Christ s words, 
nor the sense of His words. ... If the rod" [of Aaron] 
"could not remain with the serpent, how much less can 
the bread remain with the Flesh of Christ ?" 

" Christ does not say Hoc est Sanguis Meus but f H ic 
est Sanguis Meus/ . . . Though wine is of the neu 
ter gender, yet Christ did not say hoc but f hic est 

30 Synopsis of the "Assertio" 

Sanguis Meus/ And though bread is of the masculine 
gender, yet, notwithstanding, he says, Hoc est Corpus 
Meum/ not f hic, that it may appear by both articles 
that He did not mean to give bread or wine, but His 
own Body and Blood." So "bread is not in the Eucha 
rist," concludes Henry. If the Acts speak of the 
Eucharist as bread, it is because It was formerly, or 
still appeared as bread; just as Aaron s rod, though 
changed to a serpent, is still called a rod. Christ said 
"This is My Body," not "My Body is in this," or "With 
this which you see, is My Body." Luther says the word 
"transubstantiation" has risen up inside the last 300 
years. Henry replies that 400 years ago "Hugo de 
Sancto Victore writ a Book of the Sacraments," and 
said : " By the word of Sanctification the true substance 
of bread and wine is turned or changed into the true 
Body and Blood of Christ, only the form of bread and 
wine remaining, and the substance passing into another 

"Eusebius Emissenus, dyed about 600 years since, 
. . . said, Now the invisible Priest converteth, by His 
secret power, the visible creatures into His own Body 
and Blood, saying, "Take and eat, this is My Body." " 

St. Augustine: "We honour (says he) invisible 
things, viz., the Flesh and Blood in the form of the 
bread and wine." 

"St. Gregory Nissenus says, That before the conse 
cration it is but bread; but when it is consecrated by 
mystery, it is made, and called the Body of Christ. 7 

"Theophilus . . . says, The Bread is not a figure 
only of the Body of Christ, but is changed into the 
proper Body of the Flesh and Blood of Christ. . . . 
Our Lord, condescending to our weakness, preserves 
the forms of the bread and wine, but changes the bread 
and wine into Plis own true Flesh and Blood. " 

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 31 

"St. Cyril . . . says, God, condescending to our 
frailties, lest we should abhor flesh and blood on the holy 
altars, infuseth the force of life into what is offered, by 
changing them into the truth of His own proper 
Flesh. " 

"St. Ambrose . . . said, Although the form of 
bread and wine is seen, nevertheless we are to believe 
that there is nothing else after the consecration but the 
Body and Blood of Christ. " 

So the Fathers teach, not consubstantiation, but tran- 

Luther "denies it [the Mass] to be a good work," 
though "he sees and confesses himself that the opinions 
of the Holy Fathers are against him, as also the Canon 
of the Mass, with the custom of the universal Church, 
confirmed by the usage of so many ages, and the consent 
of so many people. . . . He strives ... to excite 
the commonalty against the nobility. . . . He says 
that we ought to receive the Communion with faith 
alone. . . . The more clear, pure, and free from 
the stain of sin our consciences are, in the worse 
capacity are we to receive. . . . Mass is no sacrifice : 
it is only profitable to the priest, not to the people; 
that it is nothing available either to the dead or the 

Henry expounds the Mass and shows "Christ to be 
the eternal Priest : ... on the cross He consum 
mated the sacrifice which He began in the supper. . . . 
The consecration in the supper and the oblation on the 
cross is celebrated and represented together in the sacra 
ment of the Mass." 

Henry then shows that the Mass said by priests is a 
good work. "The Mass of every priest helps those to 
salvation who, by their faith, have deserved." . . . The 
Mass is a sacrifice, for "the priests do not only perform 

32 Synopsis of the "Assertio" 

what Christ did in His last supper, but also what He 
has afterwards done on the cross." We must accept not 
only the words of Scripture, but also the tradition of 
the Church. 

The Mass is a true sacrifice to God, despite Luther s 
objection that it is received by the priest; for so were 
all of Moses sacrifices received by priests. St. Am 
brose and St. Gregory are quoted to prove the Mass a 
sacrifice, and Augustine, who says: "The Oblation is 
every day renewed, though Christ has but once suf 
fered." . . . "Other sacraments are only profitable 
to particular persons receiving them ; this, in the Mass, 
is beneficial to all, in general." Moreover, even a the 
wickedness of the minister, be it never so great, is not 
able to lessen or avert the benefit of It from the people." 
It is to be adored, and also received at least once a year. 
Henry sums up this chapter and shows that Luther 
tries to draw people and even clergy from receiving 


f Baptism 

"HE has treated of Baptism itself after such a man 
ner, that it had been better he had not touched it at all." 
Have faith and baptism, and then no matter what sins 
you commit. "He [Luther] says, The baptized man 

. . cannot lose his salvation, though willing to do it, 
by any sin whatsoever, except infidelity. Penance is 
not necessary, though St. Jerome said, "Penance is the 
board after shipwreck." Next Luther says that faith 
without the sacrament suffices. The two theories of the 
causality of sacramental grace are contradicted by 
Luther; he makes faith a cloak for a wicked life; he 

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 33 

would undo all authority and order. "Why does he 
thus reproachfully raise himself against the Bishop of 
Rome? ... To demolish Christ s Church, so long 
founded upon a firm rock ; erecting to themselves a new 
church, compacted of flagitious and impious people." 


f tbe Sacrament of penance 

FOEGIVENESS is no new doctrine, as Luther would 
imply, but a very old and common practice indeed. 


f Contrition 

LUTHER says that "after they are loosed by the word 
of man here on earth, they are absolved by God in 

If God "has promised forgiveness only to those who 
are as contrite as the greatness of their crimes requires, 
then Luther himself cannot (as he commands all others 
to be) be assured and out of doubt that his sins are for 
given him. If God has promised pardon to such as are 
less contrite attrites by that Luther agrees with 
those he but now reprehended. But if God has prom 
ised it to such as have no manner of sorrow for their 
sins, He has surely much more promised it to such as 
are attrite. . . . If he admits but only contrition, 
that is, a sufficient grief, then can nobody be assured 
that he is absolved." 

Besides, Luther s motives for contrition are not even 
as good as those always inculcated. 

34: Synopsis of the "Assertio" 


f Confession 

LUTHER says public sins are to be confessed; he is 
not clear on private sins. Ecclesiasticus, St. John 
Chrysostom, Numbers, St. James, Isaias, St. Ambrose, 
St. Augustine, and custom, all prove confession of 
secret sins by "the divine order of God. . . . Confes 
sion was instituted and is preserved by God Himself, 
not by any custom of the people, or institution of the 

"Now Luther is condemning the reservation of some 
sins . . . so as not to discern jurisdiction from Or 
der. Luther says Christ s words, conferring the power 
of forgiving sins, apply to the laity; Augustine, Bede, 
Ambrose, the whole Church deny it; which do you be 


f Satisfaction 

LUTHER says satisfaction is a renewal of life, and 
asserts that the Church does not teach this. He asserts 
that faith without good works suffices: "God does 
nothing regard our works." Henry exhorts Luther to 
repent and make satisfaction for his undervaluing 
Penance, and, indeed, denying it to be a sacrament at 


f Confirmation 

LUTHER denies this to be a sacrament. Tradition, 
Henry shows, is authority for our faith. Then Henry 
expounds the sacrament of Confirmation. 

Synopsis of the " Asserlio" 35 


f tbe Sacrament of flDarriage 

"MARRIAGE ... is ... denied by Luther to be 
any sacrament at all. Luther says, Marriage was 
amongst the ancient Patriarchs and amongst the Gen 
tiles, and that as truly as amongst ns, yet was it not a 
sacrament with either of them. Divorcement was not 
lawful in former times amongst the people of God." 

Henry, quoting from Ephesians, declares : a He 
tells you that the man and wife make one body, of 
which the man is the head; and that Christ and the 
Church make one body, of which Christ is the head. 
Adam s words, "A man shall leave father and mother 
and cleave to his wife," show the dignity of marriage 
a "great sacrament in Christ and His Church." 
Moreover, says Henry, "Observe that the Apostle s 
business, in that place, to the Ephesians, is not about 
teaching them how great a sacrament Christ joined with 
the Church is ; but about exhorting married people how 
to behave themselves one towards another, so as they 
might render their marriage a sacrament, like, and 
agreeable to, that so sacred a thing of which it is a 
sacrament." Luther s saying the Greek word is mys 
tery does not change the sense of the thing named, "see 
ing it is taught so to be by the circumstance of the 
whole matter. . . . There is no sacrament but what 
is a mystery." Augustine and Jerome disagree with 
Luther. . . . "Augustine, above a thousand times, 
calls it the sacrament of marriage." 

"The Apostle says, This sacrament is great, but I 
speak in Christ and the Church. What sacrament is 
that that is great in Christ and the Church? Christ 
and the Church cannot be a sacrament in Christ and 

36 Synopsis of the "Assertio" 

the Church; for none speaks after this manner. It is 
therefore a necessary consequence that this sacrament, 
which he says is great in Christ and the Church, is that 
conjunction of man and wife which he has spoken of." 

Luther denies that matrimony gives any grace. The 
Apostle calls it "a bed unspotted/ 7 and Henry argues 
that "marriage should not have an immaculate bed, if 
the grace, which is infused by it, did not turn that unto 
grace, which should be otherwise a sin." 

"The Apostle saith, If any brother hath a wife, an 
infidel, and she consent to live with him, let him not put 
her away. And if any woman hath a husband, an infi 
del, and he consent to dwell with her, let her not put 
away her husband. For the man, an infidel, is sancti 
fied by the faithful woman ; and the woman, an infidel, 
is sanctified by the faithful husband; otherwise your 
children should be unclean, but now they are holy. 
Do not these words of the Apostle show that in mar 
riage . . . the sanctity of the sacrament sanctifies 
the whole marriage, which before was altogether un 

When it is said of the first marriage, "God blessed 
them [Adam and Eve], did He give no grace to their 
souls?" . . . 

: What God hath joined together, let no man put 
asunder/ . . . There must be understood sure 
something more holy than the care of propagating the 
flesh, which God performs in marriage ; and that, with 
out all doubt, is grace; which is, by the Prelate of all 
sacraments, infused into married people in consecrating 

So reasoning and tradition both prove marriage to 
be a sacrament. 

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 37 


f tbe Sacrament of rbers 

LUTHER denies Orders to be a sacrament. "There 
is no difference of priesthood between the laity and 
priest: all men are priests alike. . . . The sacra 
ment of Orders is nothing else but the custom of elect 
ing a preacher in the Church . . . whose wicked 
doctrine all men may see tends directly to the destruc 
tion of the faith of Christ by infidelity." 

a The Church/ says Luther, "can discern the word 
of God from the word of men." Luther s fundamental 
reduced ad absurdum. Did not the Apostle warn 
Timothy, "Impose not hands lightly upon any man" ? 
Were not Aaron and his sons made priests of the Old 
Law? Luther reviles St. Dionysius, who calls Orders 
a sacrament. Testimonies of St. Jerome, St. Gregory 
and St. Augustine as to Orders being a sacrament, and 
of a permanent character. Luther shown to be wrong 
in saying laymen are equal to priests, for priests only 
can consecrate. Luther had even said : "That the peo 
ple without the bishop, but not the bishop without the 
people, can ordain priests." Why, then, says Henry, 
does the Apostle warn Timothy, " Neglect not the grace 
which is in thee, and which has been given thee by 
prophecy, by the imposition of the hands of the presby 
tery ? And in another place, to the same, I admonish 
thee that thou stir up the grace of God that is in thee, 
by the imposition of my hands. Resume. 

38 Synopsis of the "Assertio" 


f tbe Sacrament of Eytreme TUnction 

"!F ever Luther was mad at any time, ... he is 
certainly distracted here, in the Sacrament of Extreme 
Unction," says Henry. "You see how he here endeav 
ours in two ways to weaken the words of the Apostle. 
First he will not have the epistle to have been writ by 
the Apostle. Secondly, though it was by him written, 
yet will he not have the Apostle to have authority oi 
instituting sacraments. . . . They are the chief 
weapons by which he intends to destroy this sacrament." 
But Luther is confuted by St. Jerome and by Luther 
himself. When Extreme Unction should be adminis 
tered. It is a sign of grace for the soul ; not necessarily 
to give health to the body. " This Unction/ he says, 
is no sacrament, because it does not always heal the 
body. 7 Luther has reason to deny St. James Epistle, 
for it denies Luther s teaching. But Luther goes far 
ther and denies and defies the whole Church. "I ad 
vise all Christians that, as the most exterminating of 
plagues, they shun him who endeavours to bring into the 
Church of Christ such foul prodigies, being the very 
doctrine of anti-Christ. For, if he who endeavours to 
move a schism in any one thing is to be extirpated with 
all care, with what great endeavour is he to be rooted 
out who not only goes about to sow dissension, but to stir 
up the people against the chief Bishop, children against 
their parents, Christians against the Vicar of Christ." 
Though he shows signs of death, yet he will not let the 
pious Vicar of Christ act as the Good Shepherd and 
save him from the wolf of hell. If Luther had spoken 
privately to the Pope of the errors he condemned, the 
Pope had doubtless blessed him. But no ! He publicly 

Synopsis of the "Assertio" 39 

exposed and pointed to the shame of his father. "After 
which he was summoned to Rome, that he might either 
render reasons for his writings, or recant what he had 
inconsiderately written, having any security imagin 
able offered him, that he should not undergo the pun 
ishment which he deserved, with sufficient expenses of 
fered him for his journey. But ... he refused to 
go. And . . . made his appeal to a general council, 
yet not to every council, but to such as should next meet 
in the Holy Ghost: that in whatsoever council he was 
condemned, he might deny the Holy Ghost to be present 
therein. The most conscientious shepherd has at length 
been forced to cast out from the fold the sheep suffering 
with an incurable disease, lest the sound sheep be cor 
rupted by contact." 

Henry wishes Luther might repent, and exhorts all 
Christians to unity: "Do not listen to the insults and 
detractions against the Vicar of Christ, which the fury 
of this little monk spews up against the Pope . . . 
this one little monk, ... in temper more harmful than 
all Turks, all Saracens, all infidels everywhere." 

ccaeion, rigln anb Motive of tbe 

IN this chapter the Occasion, Origin and Motive of 
the royal tractate will be set forth in the words of repu 
table chroniclers and historians. It is hoped that the 
reader will not be repelled by the series of quotations 
their excuse is the not unreasonable one that it has cost 
time and labour to bring them together, some from rare 
and at times inaccessible books ; in a very few cases the 
writer has been obliged to take them at second-hand. 

To begin, then, with 

I. The Occasion of the "Assertio" : 

Audin* tells us that across the sea "Germany now, 
for the first time, beheld her ancient faith attacked, not 
by arguments, but by ridicule, for that was the weapon 
used by Luther." . . . That, moreover, "This apostate 
monk . . . would recognize the existence of no law for 
his own personal acts, either moral or physical ; . . . 
that Luther . . . asserted that a single individual 
might be right, though opposed to popes, councils, doc 
tors, the past and the present; . . . that he com 
pared the syllogism to the ass." 

Luther s "Babylonish Captivity" was sent by Luther 
to the Pope, "with expressions of personal respect, and 
invoking him to set about a work of reformation in his 
corrupt court."f 

*Henry VIII., Ch. IX., pp. 88, 89. 
fBeckett s English Reformation, XVII. 

Occasion, Origin and Motive of the ef Assertio" 41 

James Gairdner* says that "Luther in his Babylon 
ish Captivity repudiated the Pope s authority entirely, 
attacked the whole scholastic system, . . . and declared 
four of the reputed seven sacraments to be of only hu 
man origin." 

As to England the situation is briefly but clearly 
stated by Patonif "The long reign of Henry VIII., 
1509-1547, falls practically into two periods of nineteen 
years each : in the former of which he was the champion 
of Popery against all comers, against Luther among 
the rest, under the title still worn by our sovereigns, 
Defender of the Faith. 7 " 

It was in the former half of his reign that the com 
position of the King s treatise took place ; a few quota 
tions from the best sources will give a reliable outline 
of the situation which occasioned the "Assertio." Poly- 
dore Vergil, $ a contemporary Italian historian of Eng 
land, says of Henry s book and its title : 

"Quocirca Henricus rex, qui habebat regnum suum 
maxime omnium religiosum, veritus ne uspiam labes 
aliqua religionis fieret, primum libros Lutheranos, quor 
um magnus jam numerus pervenerat in manus suorum 
Anglorum, comburendos curavit, deinde libellum contra 
earn doctrinam luculenter composuit misitque ad Leo- 
nem pontificem, . . . turn Henricum defensorem 
fidei appellavit, quo ille deinceps titulo usus est." 

Confirming this statement of the large quantity of 
Luther s books already in England, is the injunction 

^English Church in the Sixteenth Century, p. 78. 

f James Porter, British History and Papal Claims, Vol. I. , p. 40. 

JPolydori Vergilii Urbinatis. Anglise Historic Libri Vigintisep- 
tem, lib. XXVII., fol. 684. As to Polydore Vergil s reliability, 
Mr. H. Ellis, in the Preface to Polydore Vergil s English History, 
published by the Camden Society, says: " That Polydore Vergil s 
History is entirely without mistakes cannot be asserted, but they are 
very few." 

42 Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 

against their being read, sent by Leo to Wolsey ; it is as 
follows :* 

"Et quia dicti errores et plures alii in diversis libellis 
per Martinum Lutherum hseresiarcham compositis, 
continebantur, libellos ipsos in quocumque idiomate re- 
periebantur, damnavimus, ne libellos, bujusmodi 
errores ipsos continentes legere, imprimere, publicare, 
seu defendere, aut in domibus suis, sive aliis publicis 
vel privatis locis tenere quomodo prsesumerent ; qui- 
nimmo illos, statim post literarum nostrarum, super his 
editarum publicationem ubicumque forent per ordina- 
rios et alios in dictis literis expresses diligenter qusesi- 
tos, publice et solemniter in prsesentia cleri et populi, 
sub posnis in iisdem literis expressis, comburentur, 
ipsique Martino, ut ab omni prsedicatione desisteret, 

The following extract describes the condemnation and 
burning of Luther s books at St. Paul s Church, Lon 
don, and complements the foregoing quotation ; it shows 
also that the Pope s mandate was promptly and solemnly 
executed. It is from the Cottonian MSS. in the British 
Museum (Vitell. b. 4, p. Ill) and is entitled: "Pope s 
Sentence against Martin Luther, published at London." 

"The xij daye of Maye in the yeare of our Lord 
1521, and in the thirteenth yeare of the Reigne of our 
Soveraigne Lord Kinge Henry the eighte of that Name, 
the Lord Thomas Wolsey, by the grace of God Legate 
de Latere, Cardinal of Sainct Cecely and Archbishop of 
Yorke, came unto Saint Paules Churche of London, 
with the most parte of the Byshops of the Realme, 
where he was received with procession, and sensid by 

* Rymer, Fcedera, Vol. XIII. , p. 742. " Bulla Leonis X. Cardi- 
nali Eborum, de potestatibus super lectione librorum Martini 

Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 43 

Mr. Kichard Pace, then beinge Deane of the said 
Church. After which ceremonies done, there were four 
Doctors that bare a canope of cloth of gold over him 
goinge to the Highe Alter, where he made his oblacion ; 
which done, hee proceeded forth as abovesaid to the 
Crosse in Paules Church Yeard, where was ordeined a 
scaffold for the same cause, and he, sittinge under his 
cloth of estate which was ordeined for him, his two 
crosses on everie side of him ; on his right hand sittinge 
on the place where hee set his feete, the Pope s embas- 
sador, and nexte him the Archbishop of Canterbury: 
on his left hand the Emperor s embassador, and nexte 
him the Byshop of Duresme, and all the other Byshops 
with other noble prelates sate on twoe formes outeright 
forthe, and ther the Byshop of Rochester made a ser 
mon, by the consentinge of the whole clergie of Eng 
land, by the commandment of the Pope, against one 
Martinus Eleuthereus, and all his workes, because hee 
erred sore, and spake against the hollie faithe; and de 
nounced them accursed which kept anie of his bookes, 
and there were manie burned in the said church yeard 
of his said bookes duringe the sermon, which ended, my 
Lord Cardinall went home to dinner with all the other 

Not only was London infected with Luther s errors, 
but they had reached Hereford at least, for in Wilkins 
"Concilia"* we read of Wolsey s order to the Bishop of 
Hereford about Luther s books and a catalogue of forty- 
two errors contained in them: it is entitled as follows: 
"Mandatum cardinalis Wolseii episcopo Herefordensi, 
de exquirendis libris M. Lutheri prohibitis; cum cata- 
logo XLII errorum in iis contentorum ex. reg. Episc. 
Heref., fol. 66." 

* Vol. III., p. 690. 

44 Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 

Lord Herbert of Cherbury, a seventeenth-century his 
torian of Henry VIII., says :* 

"Our king, being at leisure now from wars, and for 
the rest delighting much in learning, thought he could 
not give better proof either of his zeal or education, than 
to write against Luther. In this also he was exasper 
ated, for that Luther had often times spoken contempt 
uously of the learned Thomas of Aequine, who yet was 
so much in request with the King, . . . that, as 
Polydore hath it, he was called Thomisticus." 

And Roscoe, in his Life of Leo X.,f adds to this and 

"Such was the reception they [the new opinions of 
the Reformation] met with in this country [England], 
that Henry VIII. , who had, in his youth, devoted some 
portion of his time to ecclesiastical and scholastic 
studies, not only attempted to counteract their effects by 
severe restrictions, but condescended to enter the lists 
of controversy with Luther, in his well-known work, 
written in Latin, and entitled A Vindication of the 
Seven Sacraments. " 

Henry, then, loved theological learning in general, 
and St. Thomas in particular, as its most gifted expon 
ent ; for this reason alone Luther must have been odious 
to the royal English theologian. 

Audin^: says: 

"Luther again republished his insulting tirade 
against the Angel of the Schools in his Captivity of 
the Church at Babylon. . . . All Henry s knowl 
edge of theology, and he was no bad theologian, he was 
indebted for to St. Thomas Aquinas, his inseparable 
companion, who, beautifully bound, occupied the most 

*Life and Reign of Henry VIII., p. 85. 
fBchned., II., p. 231. 
JHenry VHt., p. 89. 

Occasion,, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 45 

prominent place in his library, and which he read over 
and over again, and each time with fresh ardour; and 
his chief advisers, Fisher, Wolsey, and More, were as 
enamoured with St. Thomas as himself. . . . Hap 
pily for Henry, the monk, in his Captivity of the 
Church at Babylon, had created a new dogma, whence 
he had excluded the sacraments of order, extreme unc 
tion and penance ; indulgences, purgatory and the pa 
pacy. . . . His [Henry s] address, Ad Lectores, 
which he placed at the commencement, might have been 
taken as the production of a theologian of the twelfth 
century. His aged mother had been insulted, and there 
fore, as an affectionate son, he had hastened to her de 

II. The Origin of the "Assertio." On this subject 
Bishop Creighton s* remarks are rich and graphic: 

"But besides ecclesiastical ceremonies (in London) 
and bonfires of Luther s books, Wolsey discussed with 
his master (Henry VIII.) the theological aspect of Lu 
ther s teaching. Henry showed such knowledge of the 
subject that Wolsey suggested he should express his 
views in writing. The result was that the English King 
entered the lists of theological controversy. ... In 
August the book was printed, though it was not pub 
lished till it had been formally presented to the Pope. 
Alexander received an early copy. He found the work 
to be a collection of precious gems. If kings, he writes, 
are of this strength, farewell to us philosophers. . . . 
Henry felt aggrieved that the English King had no 
title to set by the side of Catholic and Most Christian, 
which were enjoyed by the Kings of Spain and France. 
Wolsey represented to the Pope that the English King 
deserved some recognition of his piety and the claim 

*History of the Papacy during the Period of the Reformation, 
Vol. V., pp. 163, 164. 

46 Occasion, Origin and Motive of ihe "Assertio" 

engaged the serious attention of a consistory on June 
10. There was no lack of suggestions: Faithful, 
Orthodox/ Apostolic/ Ecclesiastical/ Proctor/ are 
some out of the number. . . . The King s book ar 
rived at Rome, and on September 14 was presented to 
the Pope, who read it with avidity and extolled it to 
the skies. But this was not enough to mark the impor 
tance of the occasion, and it was formally presented in a 
consistory. After this the Pope proposed Defender of 
the Faith as a suitable title; some demurred on the 
ground that a title ought not to exceed a single word, 
and still hankered after The Orthodox or Most Faith 
ful ; but the Pope decided in favor of Defender of the 
Faith/ and all agreed. . . . In a letter written by 
Pace to Wolsey, November 19 (Brewer, Calendar, 
1772), the King s thanks are conveyed to Wolsey for 
having suggested this work. Doubtless the King con 
sulted with others, chiefly with Fisher, but there is no 
reason to doubt that the work was substantially his own." 

Pallavicini* also declares that Cardinal Wolsey 
asked the Pope for some extraordinary title for Henry. 

An interesting and rare account of the origin of the 
"Assertio" is given in the quaint old book entitled 
"The Annals of England."f It says : 

"The King having written a booke against Martin 
Luther, sent it as a present to Pope Leo the 
Tenth. . . . 

"Henry being offended with Luther s new (as the 
world then deemed them) tenets, thought it would 
prove to his honour, by writing against Luther, to mani 
fest his learning and piety to the world. Herupon 
under his name a book was set forth, better beseeming 

*Hist. du Con. deTrente, I., col. 676. 

fin Latin, by Francis Lord Bishop of Hereford. Englished by 
Morgan Godwyn, p. 47. 

Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 47 

some antient and deep divine, than a youthful prince, 
(whom although he earnestly endeavoured it, yet his 
affairs would not permit to bury himselfe among his 
books) which many thought to have been compiled by 
Sir Tho. More, some by the Bishop of Rochester, and 
others (not without cause) suspected to be the worke of 
some other great scholler. . . . This booke was so ac 
ceptable to the Pope, that according to the example of 
Alexander the Sixt, who entituled the King of Spain 
Catholic; and of that Pope whosoever he were, that 
gave the French King the title of Most Christian; he 
decreed to grace King Henry and his successors with 
that honourable one of Defender of the Faith/ which 
severall titles are by these princes to this day." 

The historian Speed* seems to belittle the worth of 
the title and the King s personal merit. He says : 

"Carolus, Henricus, vivant, defensor uterque, 
Henricus fidei, Carolus Ecclesise. 

"Why the titles Defender of the Church and Faith 
were attributed unto these two Princes, is no marvell; 
for Charles chosen Emperour, was scarcely confirmed, 
but to purchase the Pope s favour, he directed forth a 
solemne Writ of outlawry against Martin Luther, who 
then had given a great blow to the Papal Crowne. And 
King Henry likewise was renowned in Rome, for writ 
ing a Booke against the said Luther, unpropping the 
tottering or downe-cast countenance of the Pope s par 
dons; which Luther shrewdly had shaken; the Pope 
therefore, to show himselfe a kinde father unto those his 
sonnes, gave them these titles ; which in truth were none 
other, then the same which they sware unto, when the 
Crownes of their empires were first set upon their heads." 

Luther had said in his "Babylonian Captivity": "I 
*Hist. of Great Brit., p. 991. 

48 Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 

must now deny that there are seven Sacraments, and 
bind them to three baptism, the Lord s Supper, and 
penance." Apropos of this denial, Canon Flanagan 
gives the following account* of the occasion of the 
King s treatise: 

"Henry VIII. himself, assisted, it is thought, by Wol- 
sey, and Fisher the bishop of Rochester, and Sir 
Thomas More, wrote a treatise upon the seven Sacra 
ments against Luther. The latter speedily answered, 
never being at a loss, if not for arguments at least for 
fitting words. His answer was replied to by Sir 
Thomas More. Again he [Luther] took up the pen. 
... It was in acknowledgment of this defence of the 
Church s doctrine that Henry received from the Pope 
what his successors have tenaciously retained, the title 
of Defender of the Faith. It appears that sometime 
before writing the treatise, he had sued for the title of 
Most Christian which Julius II. had threatened to 
withdraw from the schismatical Louis XII. Disap 
pointed in this, he presented his treatise to Leo X. for 
his examination and approval, and petitioned for the 
other title, promising to be equally zealous against 
Luther s followers in England as against Luther him 
self. It was granted after mature deliberation by Leo 
in 1521, and again by Clement in 1524." 

III. The Motive of the "Assertio." As to the motive 
for which the "Assertio" was composed, Mr. John 
Clark, Orator for Henry VIII. , in his address to 
Leo X. at the presentation of the "Assertio" at the papal 
court, says: 

"Only first be pleased that I declare the Reason that 

moved my most serene King to undertake this Work. 

For I believe it will cause Admiration in several, that 

a Prince . . . should now, for the Glory of God, and 

*Vol. II., pp. 24, 25, of his "History of the Church in England." 

Occasion., Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 49 

Tranquillity of the Roman Church, by his Ingenuity 
and Pen, put a Stop to Heresies, which so endanger the 
Catholic Faith. 

"These, most holy Father, are the chief Reasons, of 
his entering upon this Work: his accustomed Venera 
tion to Your Holiness ; Christian Piety in the Cause of 
God; and a royal Grief and Indignation of see 
ing Religion trodden under Foot. I confess the Desire 
of Glory might have been able to have induced him to 
these Things ... in the field of learning against Mar 
tin Luther." 

Henry himself, in his "Epistle Dedicatory" to Leo, 
states "the Reasons that obliged Us to take upon Us 
this Charge of Writing. We have seen Tares cast into 
our Lord s Harvest; Sects do spring up, and Heresies 
increase, . . . also to declare Our great Respect towards 
Your Holiness, Our Endeavours for the Propagation of 
the Faith of Christ, and Our Obedience to the Service 
of Almighty God." And in his "To the Reader," 
Henry declares: "I cannot but think myself obliged 
... to defend my Mother, the Spouse of Christ." 

In the "Archseologia," Vol. XXIII., page 69, Ellis, 
quoting John Bruce, says: "Henry s book was not 
written to get the title but was seized upon as a clinch 
ing argument for obtaining the title which had been 
asked the book being all the while in preparation, but 
not formally for that purpose." 

Father Bridgett thinks that Henry acted from a 
high and pure intention, i. e., the defence of the Church. 
He says:* "In 1520 Luther published his treatise 
called The Babylonian Captivity, in which he finally 
broke with the Church, railed at the Pope, and called 
on the world to embrace an entirely new religion, under 
the name of genuine Christianity. 

*Sir Thomas More, pp. 210-213- 

50 Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 

"In 1521, Henry printed his book called Defence of 
the Seven Sacraments. 7 Luther replied in a treatise so 
scurrilous that it has probably no parallel in literature. 
Certainly such language had never before been ad 
dressed to a King or Prince. It cannot be said that 
Henry had drawn this upon his own head. He had not 
attacked Luther, but stepped in as the Church s cham 
pion, to ward off the blows Luther was aiming at her. 
On the whole his defence is dignified, and he uses lan 
guage no stronger than had been used in all ages, by 
saints and doctors, against inventors of novelties and 
disturbers of unity. In this book of Henry s More had 
no other share than that, after it was written, he had 
arranged the index. But against his will he was 
drawn into the controversy. . . . The King, however, 
in all probability, himself suggested to More that his 
wit would be well employed in chastising the insolent 
friar. This I gather from More s own words: . . . 
Nothing could have been more painful to me than to 
be forced to speak foul words to pure ears. But there 
was no help for it. . . . His book is not a treatise 
on Lutheranism, for Lutheranism as a system had not 
yet been enunciated, and was still incomplete in the 
brain of its author. He refutes indeed both the denials 
and assertions of Luther as they occur, but it is with 
Luther himself and Luther s language to Henry that he 
is dealing. . . . He did not consider that his own book 
was to have any permanent value." 

Finally as to Henry s motive in writing the "As- 
sertio" a most clever and interesting piece of literary 
detective work, whether convincing or not, has been 
done by Seebohm. It is this : G-airdner, in his "History 
of the English Church,"* says that Henry "declared 
to More a secret reason for maintaining it [the Pope s 

*P. 79. 

Occasion, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 51 

supremacy] so strongly; of which reason Sir Thomas 
had never heard before, and which must remain to us 
a matter of speculation." 

Seebohm has tried to fathom this secret. He says: 
"I propose in this paper* to inquire what was the mo 
tive which induced Henry VIII. to write his celebrated 
book against Luther. The motive hitherto assigned 
that of earning the title of Defender of the Faith 
does not, upon consideration, seem to me a sufficiently 
strong one. . . . Henry, knowing that the validity 
of his own marriage [with Catharine of Aragon] and 
Mary s legitimacy depended upon the validity of the 
Papal power of dispensation, would be likely to regard 
the attack of Luther upon the Papal power, when in 
1521 it assumed so dangerous an attitude, as a ques 
tion of personal importance to himself. He had, in 
deed, abundant reason to insert in his book against 
Luther passages which appeared unwisely strong to the 
mind of Sir Thomas More, as yet uninitiated into royal 
secrecy, and at the same time skeptical of the divine 
authority of the Papal jurisdiction. What, then, was 
this secret cause 7 of which More had never heard be 
fore/ and which, when divulged, proved the turning- 
point in his views on this subject? The conjecture 
may at least be hazarded that it also related to the 
King s marriage. It is not only possible, but also most 
probable, that More, relying upon Catharine s asser 
tion previous to her marriage, shared in the popular 
view that the impediment to the marriage was one 
merely of ecclesiastical law, and not an impediment 
jure divino. And it is obvious that in this popular 
view of the nature of the impediment it was one which 

*In the Fortnightly Review, edited by John Morley, vol. for Jan. 
June, pp. 509 and fol., 1868, " Sir Thomas More and Henry VIII. s 
Book against Luther," by Frederic Seebohm. 

52 Occasion,, Origin and Motive of the "Assertio" 

the Pope could well be considered as able to dispense 
with by virtue of the power vested in him by the com 
mon consent of Christendom, whether the Papal su 
premacy were of divine institution or not. The secret 
which Henry divulged to More may therefore have 
been, what afterwards became the ground for the di 
vorce, viz., that the previous marriage with Prince 
Arthur having been consummated was an impediment 
jure divino/ and consequently, could not be dispensed 
with by the Pope unless the Papal power of dispensa 
tion were held to be jure divino. "* 

Mr. Brownf seems inspired by the same idea when 
he writes that Henry was not sincere in his book, espe 
cially about the authority of the Pope, but that he had 
an "ulterior aim." 

What truth is in this alleged motive it is surely diffi 
cult, not to say impossible, to decide, for while Henry s 
after life would incline one to believe him capable of a 
deep ulterior purpose, his earlier life would lead one to 
believe him sincere and earnest. Was his motive in 
writing the "Assertio" to save his own English people 
and Europe from the new religious movement? Was 
it to check Luther, or at least to be avenged on him? 
Was it to obtain a Papal title? Was it to strengthen 
the foundation of the Papal authority ? The latter may 
have been the predominant motive in the King s mind, 
without exclusion of the others; the relative force of 
each it would be difficult now to estimate with any de 
gree of accuracy. 

*Conf. "The Era of the Protestant Revolution," by Seebohm, 
pp. 172 and fol., Scribner s, 1874. The execution of the Duke of 
Buckingham at this time by Henry is attributed by Seebohm to 
Buckingham s having spoken of the invalidity of Henry s marriage 
with Catharine. 

fBoy. Hist. So. Transactions, VIII., 257. 

Hutborebip of tbe "asaertlo" 

WHO wrote the "Assertio" ? That is, who composed 
or compiled it? For the authorship is far from a 
settled question. 

The chief testimonies adverse to Henry s authorship 
are first given and then those maintaining it, that the 
reader may be convinced by both the greater authority 
and number of the latter that, to say the least, it is 
more probable that Henry wrote the book: very prob 
able that he compiled it, at any rate. 

Eirst, then, the testimonies against Henry s author 
ship. In the "Calendar of State Papers between Eng 
land and Spain, 7 * edited by Bergenrath, we read the 
following : 

"The King of England has sent a book against 
Martin Luther to the Pope. It is said that all the 
learned men in England have taken part in its com 
position. Hears that it is a good book. The Pope has 
given to the King of England the title of Defender of 
the Christian Eaith. This title prejudices no one, as 
all Christian princes are, or ought to be, defenders of 
the faith. 

"[Written on the margin by Gattinara:] It is true 
that all princes ought to be defenders of the Christian 
faith. As, however, this title has been given to the 
King of England, it makes it seem as if he deserved it 
more than others, and as if others do not defend the 
faith so well as he does."f 

Henry Vin., Vol. H.,p. 381. 

fSee also Lives of the English Cardinals, by Folkstone Williams, 
Vol. II., p. 870, note, who quotes: "Juan Manuel writes, 17th 
October, 1521 : The King of England has sent a book against Mar- 

54 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

While personally Pocock believes Henry to be the 
author, yet he is fair and honest enough to quote the 
following :* 

"A letter of Cardinal Wolsey s to King Henry with 
a copy of his book for the Pope. An original. 

". . . I do send Mr. Tate unto your Highness with 
the book bound and dressed which ye purpose to send 
to the Pope s holiness. . . . I do send also unto your 
highness the choice of certain verses to be written in the 
bock to be sent to the Pope of your own hand : with the 
subscription of your name. . . . By your 
Most humble chaplain, 


This is certainly rather strong testimony, and ad 
verse to Henry s authorship. And yet its corrective 
swung PococFs decision to the other side of the ques 

But judgment must be suspended till all the evidence, 
both against and for Henry, is fully and fairly heard. 
So, then, to proceed. 

Audinf says : "The literati of the day were supposed 
to have had a hand in the composition of the work," and 
he continues, in a note, saying that Calvin said : "This 
book was written by some monk well versed in cavilling, 
and the King, having been influenced by his advisers, 
consented that it should be printed in his name, and 
though he has since repented of his rash and incon 
siderate act, he allowed it to pass under his name for 
thirty years." 

tin Luther to the Pope. It is said that all the learned men of England 
have taken part in its composition. He hears that it is a good book. 
The Pope has given to the King of England the title of " Defender 
of the Christian Faith." Written on the margin by Gattinara." 
London, Allen, 1868. 

*Burnet s Reformation, by Pocock, Vol. VI., No. 3. 
fHemy VIII., p. 92. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 55 

A humorous confession, in frankness characteristic of 
its authors, is said by Worsley* to have been made by 
Luther s countrymen. It is as follows: 

"To the Germans especially it appeared marvellous 
that a crowned head should contain so much learning." 

In the "Catalogue of the Noble and Royal Authors 
of England," in two volumes (London, MDCCLIX.), 
Vol. L, p. 9, we read an insidious innuendo: 

"HENBY THE EIGHTH. As all the successors of this 
Prince owe their unchangeable title of Defender of the 
Faith to his piety and learning, we do not presume to 
question his pretensions to a place in this catalogue. 
Otherwise a little skepticism on his Majesty s talents 
for such a performance, mean as it is, might make us 
question whether he did not write the defence of the 
Sacraments against Luther, as one of his Successors 
[Charles L] is supposed to have written the EzVcwv 
Baffi/iiicri ; that is, with the pen of some court-prelate." 

Mr. Richard Watson Dixon, in his "History of the 
Church of England," Vol. L, page 4, says rather 
disparagingly of Henry, that he was "a man of force 
without grandeur, ... of great ability but not of 
lofty intellect, . . . cunning rather than sagacious." 
In other words, that on the principle "nemo dat quod 
non habet," Henry did not write the "Assertio." 

How did it come about then ? How did Henry s 
name get to be popularly appended to it as the author ? 
Here is one answer :f "Cardinal Wolsey, having a mind 
to engage the King to act against Luther, whose opin 
ions daily spread and got ground here in England, con 
trived that an answer should be written to this book, 
which the King should own for his, and be presented 
to the Pope in his name." This is also stated by 

*Worsley, Dawn of the Reformation, p. 160. 
fLewis s Fisher, Vol. I., p. 107. 

56 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

Turner in his "History of England/ 7 * where he says 
that Henry s book "is not unlikely to have originated, 
less from Henry s literary conscience, than from Wol- 
sey s crafty contrivances." 

The famous John Foxe, in his "Acts and Monu- 
ments,"f says: 

"This book, albeit it carried the King s name in the 
title, yet it was another that administered the motion, 
another that framed the style." 

And here ends the direct testimony against Henry s 
authorship. For though what follows i. e., the 
grounds 011 which rest the claims of others to be the 
author of the " Assert io" might at first sight be ex 
pected to tell against Henry, yet eventually it will prove 
in favour of the King of England. Because as none of 
these other claims can be substantiated, they only add, 
by elimination, a new indirect argument in favour of 
Henry s being the author. 

But if not Henry who else could have composed the 
"Assertio" ? Passing by the allusion to Wolsey s hav 
ing a hand in the authorship, as not sustained by au 
thorities, Blessed John Fisher, the Bishop of Kochester, 
is the most likely, and for the following reasons: The 
"Assertio" is bound up with his works in the Wirce- 
burg edition.:): 

Pallavicini says: "Some have attributed to him 
[Fisher] the book which King Henry had had printed 
against Luther." 

The Bishop of La Kochelle, Clement Villecourt, says 

*Henry VIII., Vol. I, p. 280. 

fVol. IV., p. 293. 

JR.D.D. Joannis Fischerii Roffensis in Anglia episcopi opera 
(Wirceburgi, 1597): "Assertio Septem Sacramentorum adversus 
Martinum Lutherum, ab Henrico VIII., Angliee Rege, Roffensis 
tamen nostri hortatu et studio edita." 

Tome I., col. 848. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 57 

most decidedly that Henry was not the author, but that 
Fisher very probably was. His words are: "Je crois 
volontiers qu il [Henri] est mort sans en avoir bien 
connu une seule page [de la Captivite de Babylone]. 

"Si la Defense des sept Sacrements a ete ecrite par 
ce prince [Henri], ma conviction bien prononcee est 
qu il n en a ete que le copiste, ou qu il s est borne a 
1 ecrire sous la dictee de quelqu un. 

"Ce n est pas a quinze ans, et avant cet age, qu on 
peut etre capable de quelque succes dans celle etude. 

"Je suis persuade qne Henri n a jamais ouvert un 
volume du docteur angelique." 

Further, the bishop says that Fisher could write the 
"Assertio" in a few months, whereas it would take 
Henry as many years ; that Henry s life was so different 
from the principles of the "Assertio" that he could not 
have written it. 

With this unhesitating statement of Yillecourt, 
Thomson, in his "Memoirs of the Court of Henry 
VIII.,"* agrees partly, adding another name to the 
list of probable authors. He says: "The world . . . 
has attributed all that is valuable in this work to the as 
sistance of Bishop Fisher and of Sir Thomas More." 

So much for Fisher s claims; those of More may be 
given next. And there are indeed strong testimonies in 
favour of More s authorship, as may be seen from the 
following citations. 

The "Annals of England"f says of More : "Thomas 
More . . . cultivated literature, and being introduced 
at court about 1521, he soon became a favourite with 
the King, whom he assisted in the composition of his 
work against Luther." 

But this is not the only testimony in favour of More s 

*Vol. I., p. 380. 

f8 7ols., Oxford, 1856, Vol. II., p. 137, note. 

58 Authorship of the "Asscrtio" 

authorship. In the "Archeeologia," published by the 
Society of Antiquaries of London, in Volume XXIII. 
there is a transcript of an original MS. containing a 
memorial from Geo. Constentyne to Thos. Lord Crom 
well, etc. (p. 55 and note). It speaks of "the doubt 
which he entertains as to the authorship of the book 
against Luther, which bears Henry s name a doubt 
which appears to have arisen partly from common re 
port, but more directly from his knowledge of the extent 
of the King s scholarship. It may be seen that he at 
tributes the work to Sir Thomas More." 

Again W. H. Hutton, in his "Sir Thomas More,"* 
says: "He [More] had assisted him [Henry] in his 
book against Luther." 

A fourth author, or co-worker at least, has been sug 
gested. Schafff says: "Henry VIII. wrote in 1521 
(probably with the assistance of his chaplain, Edward 
Lee) a scholastic defence of the seven Sacraments, 
against Luther s Babylonish Captivity. Schaff prob 
ably bases this statement on the words of Luther, who 
"believed it to be the book of Dr. Edward Lee, after 
wards Archbishop of York, . . . and he struck at Lee 
through the King.":): Luther says: "There are some 
who believe that Henry is not the author of the work. 
. . . My opinion is that King Henry, perhaps, gave 
one or two yards of cloth to Lee, . . . and that Lee had 
made thereof a cape, to which he has sewed on a lining. 
What is there so wonderful in a King of England hav 
ing written against me ? ... If a King of England spits 
forth his lying insults in my face, I have the right, in 
self-defence, to thrust them down his throat." 

*P. 189. 

t History of the Christian Church, VI., 70. 
JGairdner, English Church in Sixteenth Century, p. 80. 
gAudin, Henry VIII., pp. 96, 97. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 59 

To the names of Wolsey, Fisher, More and Lee a fifth 
one, Gardiner, is added by Fuller in a pretty, even if not 
very serious way. "King Henry had lately set forth 
a book against Luther, endeavouring the confutation of 
his opinions as novel and unsound. None suspect this 
King s lack of learning (though many his lack of leisure 
from his pleasures,) for such a design; however, it is 
probable that some other Gardiner gathered the flowers, 
(made the collections,) though King Henry had the 
honour to wear the posey, carrying the credit of the title 

A sixth probable associate-author is presented because 
of his style, the claimant being Pace, and his sup 
porter being Hutton, who "thinks that the aid of More 
and Pace at most extended to the composition and cor 
rection of the Latin style/ "f 

Indeed, a seventh candidate might be added, were it 
not that the principal himself withdraws his claim ; for 
Erasmus says (Epist. Jo. Glapioni, Edit. Leid. p. 743) 
that "in Germany he [Erasmus] was thought to be the 
author of it." But in the preface of Jortin s edition his 
apologies and refutation of this statement may be seen. 

Such are the statements supporting these different 
claimants: now for their sifting, criticism and refuta 

And first of all, to be the author of a book need 
not mean that one has no quotations from others, no 
ideas from others, no suggestions, criticisms and helps 
of this kind. It must be admitted that Henry was very 
probably helped, that he has many quotations from the 
Bible and the Fathers, that it seems likely that More as 
sorted, and not improbably made the index to the "As- 

*Church History of Britain, by Thomas Fuller, Vol. II., p. 13. 
fOverton, The Church in England, Vol. I., p. 357, note 3. 

60 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

"Quoique Henri se reputat un des plus solides theo- 
logiens de son temps, il avait, avant de le publier, soumis 
son ecrit a 1 examen et a la correction du cardinal Wol- 
sey, de Fisher, eveque de Rochester, et surtout du sa 
vant Chancelier Thomas Morus."* This is admitted, 
but it would be a groundless deduction to conclude that 
Henry did not write the "Assertio." 

We are told by the most recent and decided of 
Henry s adversaries, the Bishop of La Rochelle, that be 
fore Henry was fifteen he was too young to have ac 
quired the knowledge; that after that age he had not 
leisure from his duties of state. As to the first, remem 
bering that Henry had wise, capable parents, and would 
have the best tutors and aids that the kingdom could 
give, that he had been prepared, at least remotely, to be 
Archbishop of Canterbury, that if he simply knew the 
sources where to go for his materials and arguments, 
e. g., St. Thomas s "Summa," that with this granted 
and it is certainly probable enough one can see, if he 
will read the "Assertio," no very great difficulty in 
Henry s authorship. As to the objection of the Bishop 
of La Rochelle, that it would take Henry three years 
to write the "Assertio," this is exactly what Mr. Hutton 
and Mr. Brewer say was the case, i. e., that as early as 
1518 Henry had begun the work, and finished it in 
1521. After all, it is a simple treatise, probably almost 
all culled from some standard work, e. g., St. Thomas, 
St. Bonaventure, Peter Lombard, etc., as D Aubigne 
says, some breviary of collected texts on the subjects 

But to answer the suggested authorships other than 
that of Henry: Wolsey can hardly claim a refutation. 
As to Fisher being the author, it is to be supposed that 

*Dictionnaire de la Theologie Catholique, Wetzer et Welte, art. 
Henri VIII. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 61 

he ought himself to know whether he wrote it ; and as he 
was a man who laid down his life for the truth, it is to 
be further supposed that we may believe him when he 
denies emphatically that he is the author. 

"It had been rumoured abroad that the prelate had 
dictated while Henry wrote; this/ exclaimed Fisher 
indignantly, is a calumnious falsehood. Let Henry en 
joy his meed of praise without any participation in it. 

As to the "Assertio" being bound up with Fisher s 
works, at least in the Wirceburg edition, and while it 
is said to be edited by "the care and zeal of ours of 
Rochester," yet it is said first to be by the King of 
England : "Assertio . . . Anglise Rege, Roffensis tamen 
nostri hortatu et studio edita." 

Moreover, if Fisher, not Henry, were the author, 
Fisher, not More, would have been "the sorter-out and 
indexer," for the humble bishop would hardly ask 
the Chancellor of England to make an index for him. 
And yet More says that he [More] was the "sorter- 
out,"* etc. 

Furthermore Collier criticized the style of the "As 
sertio," saying that the King "leans too much on his char 
acter as monarch, argues in his garter robes, and writes, 
as it were, with his sceptre." Now surely the gentle 
Fisher would write in any style but this, would not rely 
on character, but give a cold, calm reason for the faith 
that was in him, as his other works show he did. 

But if not Fisher, More, the glory of the age,f was 
perhaps the author, for "French and English, keen 
logic, wide knowledge, merciless wit make More an un 
surpassed controversialist of his kind.":): In rebuttal 

*Audin, Henry VIII., p. 92, quotes Saconay s introduction to the 
" Assertio." 

tPocock s Burnet s Reformation, Vol. III., p. 172. 
JMore, by Mason, p. 85. 

62 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

of this, More, who, if anything, was an honest, "plain, 
blunt man," replied : "I was only a sorter-out and placer 
of the principal matters therein contained." So he is 
quoted by his son-in-law, Wm. Roper, Esq.* 

Pocock, in his edition of Burners "Reformation," 
says :f "It is plain More wrote it not." 

e/ I 

A long, full passage in Collier:}: is interesting and 
strong, and is quoted here at length : 

"Fisher and More are reported by several of the 
Church of Rome to have made the book which goes un 
der King Henry s name against Luther; but the Lord 
Herbert is not of this opinion. He only thinks they 
might look it over at the King s instance, and interpose 
their judgment in some passages. But that the King 
after all was governed by his own sentiment, and that 
More had no hand in the composition appears pretty 
plainly from this gentleman s letter to Cromwell dated 
March, 1533. He acquaints this minister twas for 
merly his opinion that the Pope s supremacy stood only 
on Councils and prescription, and was not jure divino. 
That when the King showed him his book against Mar 
tin Luther he desired his Highness either to omit the 
point of the Papal supremacy or touch it more tenderly 
at least. For the asserting the privilege of the Pope s 
see to that height might afterwards prove unserviceable, 
in case any disputes should happen between the court 
of Rome and his Highness : that the stretch of the Pope s 
pretensions had been unfortunate to some princes, and 
that it was not impossible the same occasions might be 

*Life of Sir Thomas More, Singer, p. 65. See also Lewis s Fisher, 
Vol. I., pp. 109,110. 
fill., p. 171. 
tPt. II., Bk. II,, p. 99. See also Turner, Henry VIII., Vol. I., 

p. 281, note. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 63 

"To this the King answered he had resolved not to 
alter anything upon that head, and gave Sir Thomas 
a reason which was altogether new. This book of the 
King s, it seems, and his farther reading upon the con 
troversy, made him change his opinion in some measure, 
and rather conclude, the Pope held his Primacy by di 
vine right. However, as he continues, he still thought 
the Pope under the jurisdiction of a general council, 
and that he might be deposed, and another set up, at 
the pleasure of such an assembly. By this letter it ap 
pears More had no share in the book against Luther: 
and that he believed the King the author of that tract." 

Finally, as summing up, we quote from Mr. Brown, 
who says:* 

"Mr. Brewer seems to believe the book to have been 
written by Henry because it is so bad. The Bishop of 
La Eochelle, who wrote an introduction to the French 
edition of 1850, considers it impossible that he could 
have produced the work, because it is so good. Horace 
Walpole pronounces the book a bad one, and yet too 
good for Henry to have written." May not these three 
opinions be explained on the ground of subjective re 
ligious bias? Mr. Brewer deeming it "bad" for 
Protestants because so Catholic; the Bishop of La Ro- 
chelle "good" for Catholics because so Catholic ; and Mr. 
Walpole "bad" because against Protestants, and yet too 
"good? for Henry, lest Henry be shown to have been 
so thoroughly Catholic. 

As for the claims of Lee, Gardiner, Pace and Eras 
mus if Luther believed Lee to have written it, why did 
Luther excoriate not Lee, but the King? For Luther 
needed the King s aid in the new religious fight, and if 
he did not believe Henry an enemy of his, in all shrewd 
ness he should have tried not only not to attack him un- 
*In Royal Historical Society s Transactions, Vol. VIII. 

64: Authorship of the "Assertio" 

necessarily, but to placate him. Besides Luther later 
apologized to Henry, showing that he believed him and 
not Lee to be the author. 

As to Gardiner s claim it is a mere pretty pun. And 
Pace was only hinted at by Hutton as possibly, with 
More, having corrected the Latin mistakes. 

Erasmus, as said above, disclaimed the authorship, 
and, besides, we may add, by way of explanation, that 
Erasmus had visited Henry when Henry was nine years 
old and Henry studied Erasmus as a master and model, 
hence the similarity of Henry s style to that of Erasmus 
might be explained, if indeed there be any need of an 

These are the main reasons why neither Fisher, nor 
More, nor Lee, nor Gardiner, nor Pace, nor Erasmus 
wrote the "Assertio." Probably not all objections have 
been answered: difficulties may still exist in some 
minds; doubtless not all are convinced; but Henry s 
claims have not yet been presented. This will now be 
done. For the sake of clearness the various testimonies 
have been grouped under the following heads of proof: 

I. Henry s own statements, found in his writings 
most closely connected with the "Assertio." 

II. Statements of others in documents closely con 
nected with the "Assertio." 

III. Other works of Henry, showing in a general way 
his ability to have written the "Assertio." 

IV. The great number of witnesses declaring that 
Henry wrote the "Assertio." 

V. A summary of the arguments. 

I. As to Henry s own words in the documents most 
closely connected with the "Assertio," the following quo 
tation is taken from Henry s letter to Leo X., printed 
elsewhere in this volume. He says : 

"We have thought that this first attempt of our 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 65 

modest ability and learning could not be more worthily 
dedicated than to your Holiness." 

In the "Epistle Dedicatory" sent with the "Assertio" 
to Leo is found the following passage, unquestionably 
claiming the authorship for Henry : 

a We . . . now undertake the task of a man that 
ought to have employed all his time in the studies of 
learning. . . . We . . . have proposed to ourself to 
employ our force and power in a work so necessary and 
so profitable. . . . 

"Though We know very well, that there are every 
where several more expert, especially in Holy Writ, who 
could have more commodiously undertaken this great 
work, and performed it much better than We, yet are 
We not altogether so ignorant as not to esteem it our 
duty to employ with all our might, our wit and pen in 
the common cause. For having, by long experience, 
found that religion bears the greatest sway in the ad 
ministration of public affairs, and is likewise of no small 
importance in the commonwealth, We have employed 
no little time, especially since We came to years of dis 
cretion, in the contemplation thereof ; wherein We have 
always taken great delight : and though not ignorant of 
our small progress therein made; yet, at least, it is so 
much, as, We hope, . . . will suffice for reasons to dis 
cover the subtleties of Luther s heresy. We have there 
fore . . . entered upon this work, dedicating to your 
Holiness what we have meditated therein. . . . 

"If We have erred in any thing, We offer it to be 
corrected as may please your Holiness." 

The next quotation, likewise clearly and strongly im 
plying that Henry wrote the "Assertio," is from Henry s 
"To the Eeader." It says: "I cannot but think my 
self obliged ... to defend my mother, the Spouse of 
Christ. Which, though it be a subject more copiously 

66 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

handled by others, nevertheless I account it as much 
my own duty, as his who is the most learned, by my ut 
most endeavours, to defend the Church, and to oppose 
myself to the poisonous shafts of the enemy." 

That there were disputes as to the author of the work 
even in Henry s own day is clear from what we have 
already quoted and that, when Henry s own ears had 
heard them, he promptly took occasion flatly to deny 
these reports is clear from the following quotation from 
the King s letter to Luther. He says :* "And although 
ye sayne your self to thynke my boke nat myne owne, 
but to my rebuke (as it lyketh you to affyrme) put out 
by subtell sophisters, yet it is well knowen for myn, and 
I for myne avowe it." And again from the same docu 
ment, quoted by Audinif "As to my letter, which in 
your opinion was the work of a captious sophist, it is 
my own production, as many witnesses worthier of 
credit than yourself can testify, and the more it dis 
pleases you, the greater pleasure do I feel in acknowl 
edging myself its author." 

So that Henry s own words show that he claimed, and 
proved, or certainly tried to prove, that he was the au 
thor of the "Assertio." 

II. And to confirm this may be adduced in the second 
place the words of others who were very close to Henry 
and knew the inner history of the writing of the "As 
sertio." These words are found in the documents con 
nected with the "Assertio," and published in full else 
where in this volume. Here are a few passages from 
Mr. John Clark s Oration at the presentation of the 
"Assertio" to Leo X. : Henry, "under the charge of the 
best tutors, and a father none of the most indulgent, 

*Dibdin, II., pp. 488 and fol., No. 619, "A copy of the letter, 
etc.," of Henry to Luther. 
fHenry VIII., p. 101. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 67 

having passed his younger days in good learning, and 
afterwards so well versed in Holy Scriptures that, con 
fiding in his own abilities, he often (not without great 
glory) disputed with the most learned in Britain." . . . 

"My most serene and invincible Prince, Henry VIII., 
King of England, France and Ireland, and most affec 
tionate son of Your Holiness and of the sacred Roman 
Church, hath written a book against this work of 
Luther s which he has dedicated to Your Holiness." . . . 

Henry "undertook this pious work himself," . . . 
and, Clark continues: "The pious, and Your most de 
voted Prince, has, with all his power, endeavoured . . . 
and hopes to have acquitted himself." . . . 

Lastly, says Clark : "I believe it will cause admiration 
in several that a prince . . . should undertake such 
things [as this book] as, according to the common say 
ing, might require to employ wholly all the thoughts of 
a man. . . . By his ingenuity and pen [he] put[s] a 
stop to heresies." 

So much from Henry s ambassador, Clark; now for 
the Pope himself. In his reply to Clark s Oration, Leo 
implies that the form as well as the substance, the style 
as well as the matter were Henry s. He said : 

"His Majesty, having the knowledge, will and ability 
of composing this excellent book, against this terrible 
monster, has rendered himself no less admirable to the 
whole world, by the eloquence of his style, than by his 
great wisdom." 

In Leo s letter to Henry, acknowledging the book 
written by the King against Luther, several passages 
may be used to prove Henry s authorship. 

The very title itself contains the first : "De gratiis pro 
libro per regem contra Lutherum scripio" And in the 
body of the letter the Pope says of Henry : "Tu fidem 
Christianam thesauris tuce et pietatis et scientiae adrer- 

68 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

sum impias haereses munitam esse voluisti." And the 
Pope further speaks of the book as a "Nobilem partum 
ingenii tui" And again he goes on to say that men 
"tuis scriptis ad sanitatem debeant reduci." Finally, 
exhorting Henry to continue ever faithful, the Holy 
Father says: "Fides quoque Christiana quse nunc doc- 
trinse tuce clypeo adversus sceleratas hsereticorum in- 
sanias communita est." 

This personal, spontaneous and therefore very strong 
testimony is confirmed by Leo s Bull to Henry, 
"Bulla de gratiis pro libro per regem contra Lutherum 
scripto."* In this Bull Leo wrote apropos of Henry s 
authorship : 

"John Clark ... in our consistory . . . did present 
unto Us a book which your Majesty . . . did com 
pose." . . . 

"Your Majesty has with learning and eloquence writ 
against Luther." . . . 

"Render your Majesty so illustrious and famous to 
the whole world, as that our judgment in adorning you 
with so remarkable title may not be thought vain or 
light by any person whatsoever." 

Really, these documents should be first-class proofs, 
and they could scarcely be stronger and clearer in try 
ing to show that Clark and Leo believed the author of 
the "Assertio" to be Henry. 

III. In the third place, besides the "Assertio," there 
are other works attributed to Henry, and showing that 
consequently he might well have written the "Assertio" 
also. In Dibdinf and the "Dictionnaire de Biblio 
graphic Catholique":}: we read of "Henrici VIII. , An- 
glise regis, ad Saxoniae principes de coercenda abigen- 

*Rymer, Fcedera, printed elsewhere In this volume. 

fll., p. 485. 

JTome I., col. 868 ; Tome III., col. 431, and Tome III., col. 675. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 69 

daque Lutherana factione, et Luthero ipso epistola; 
cum Georgii, Saxonise ducis, ad eundem rescriptione ; 
Argentorati, 1523 in 4to." Also Leipsia3 (sine anno) 
in 4to. That is, "The epistle of Henry VIII. , King of 
England, to the princes of Saxony about checking and 
doing away with the Lutheran faction, and Luther him 
self : with the reply of George, Duke of Saxony, to the 

Again Dibdin* records: "Henrici Octavi Regis An- 
gliaa et Francise. . . . Ad Carolum Csesarem Augus- 
tum, etc. "An Epistle of ... Henry VIII. . . . 
to the Emperour s Maiestie, to all Christian princes," 

Then there are other works by Henry recorded :f 
"Exeniplum litterarum Henrici VIII. ad Lutherum, et 
Lutheri ad ipsum; 1525 in 4." Also edited by Pynson 
in 1526, small Svo, and by Pynson 1527, in small 8vo, 
and at Cologne by Quentell in 1527, in 4to.J 

Besides these, in the "Dictionnaire de Bibliographic 
Catholique," we read: "Opus eximium de vera differ 
entia regia3 potestatis et ecclesiastics, et quse sit ipsa 
veritas ac virtus utriusque; Londini, in sedibus Thorn. 
Bertheleti, 1534, pet. in 4 de 63 ff. Ouvrage attribue 
par Bale a Henri VIII., roi d Angleterre, et par Leland 
a Fox, eveque de Winchester. Brunet." 

Gasquet, "Eve of the Reformation," p. 101, note 1, 
refers to a book called "A Glass of Truth," written in 
favour of the divorce, and says: "The work was pub 
lished by Berthelet anonymously, but Richard Croke, 
in a letter written at this period (Ellis, Historical Let- 
nil., p. 303, Nos. 1207, 1208. 

fDic. deBib. Cath., I., 868. 

JLowndes, Biog. Manual, Part IV., p. 1039. See also Dibdin, II., 

TomeIII. f col. 1099. 

TO Authorship of the "Assertio" 

ters, 3d Series, II., 195), says that the book was writ 
ten by King Henry himself. It was generally said that 
Henry had written a defence of his divorce." 

Watts speaks of it in the following entry as Henry s 
work : "Opus eximium de vera differentia regise potesta- 
tis et ecclesiastics, et qua? sit ipsa veritas, ac virtus 
utriusque, Henrico VIII. , Anglise reg. auctore. Lond. 
1534, 4to." 

"A necessary doctrine and erudition for any Chris 
tian man. Lond. 1543, 4to. Lond. 1545, 8vo. In 
Latin, Lond. 1544, 4to." 

So that from these several writings, stated on good 
authorities to be Henry s, we may conclude that Henry 
might well have written the "Assertio," thus solidifying 
and confirming the direct statements of Henry himself, 
as well as those direct or implied statements made by 
Clark and Leo. 

IV. In the fourth place come the great number of 
first-class testimonies of historians of recognized abil 
ity and trustworthiness, who either imply or say di 
rectly that Henry is the author of the "Assertio." And 
first of all should be placed the following statement in 
the "Advertisement" to the old English translation of 
the "Assertio" that is here reprinted. It says : "Henry 
the Eighth was a Prince of great learning, considering 
the age in which he lived. He had well studied both 
Philosophy and Divinity in his youth, his father, Henry 
the Seventh, having intended him for the ecclesiastical 
state. His writings against Luther (I mean the fol 
lowing work, so much approved of by Leo the Tenth), 
shew a fund of ecclesiastical erudition, and a strength 
of understanding uncommon in persons in his high 

"Next should come the remarks of Gabriel de Saconay 
in his Preface to his Latin reprint of the "Assertio," 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 71 

done at Lyons, 1561. In his title Saconay wrote: 
"Henricus, octavus Anglise Rex, inter paucos reges lite- 
rarum et multarum rerum cognitione commendabilis, 
hunc librum conscripsit. Lugduni, apud Guliel. Rovil- 
lium sub scuto Veneto. MDLXI." 

On page LXXI he says : "Christiana tune pietate il- 
lustrissimus Anglorum rex Henricus, hujus nominis 
octavus raro nimis, et cunctis seculis admirando ex- 
emplo, ex regali f astigio in literariam descendit arenam, 
contra maledicum decertaturus mendicantium fratrum 
apostatam. Scripsit itaque assertionem septem sacra- 
mentorum adversus captivitatem Babylonicam Lutheri 
ad Leonein, hujus nominis decimum Papam, adeo sane 
diserte, erudite ac copiose, ut eo labore promeruerit ip- 
sius Papse omniumque cardinalium judicio, perpetuae 
laudis titulum, ut publica deinceps appellatione, fidei 
catholicse defensor nuncuparetur." On p. LXXII 
Saconay quotes Luther as saying : "Hie insulto papistis, 
Thomistis, Henricistis, . . . divina majestas mecum 
facit ut nihil curem si mille Augustini, mille Cypriani, 
mille ecclesise Henriciance, contra me starent." . . . 
And p. LXXIII: "Itaque extorsimus, et triumphamus 
adversus assertorem sacramentorum. . . . Quis est ipse 
Henricus novus Thomista? ... sit ipse defensor 
ecclesise, sed ejus ecclesise, quam tanto libro j act at et 

On p. LXXIV Saconay continues to quote Luther: 
"Recte conjungitur simul Papa, et Henricus de Anglia : 
ille papatum suum tarn bona habet conscientia, quam 
hie suum possidet regnum. Interea dum sic fureret 
Lutherus, quidam Germani, piam et eruditam regis An- 
glice assertionem coeperunt a Lutheranis calumniis as- 

On p. LXXVIII Saconay says : "Hsec sunt qusB huic 
libello prseponenda duxi, ut noscas, lector, quo impulsu 

72 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

Rex iste manum huic operi apposuerit." On pp. 
LXXXIII and LXXXIV Saconay says: "Perlege 
igitur, lector, hoc opusculurn antequam aliquod judi- 
cium temere feras, videbis principis animum,, qui mul- 
tum ornavit nostra studia, et religionis causam et pie 
suscepit, et diserte defendit. Olim summa pietas judi- 
cabatur, si Reges armis tutati fuissent Christianam 
tranquillitatem, hie autem ingenio et calamo propug- 
navit. Quomodo ergo non pudeat ecclesiasticos pleros- 
que tarn ociose vitam degere ? cum videant tantum 
principem in his studiis eo progressnm esse, ut libris 
etiam editis catholics religioni patrocinaretur. Ac- 
cipe itaque piam saeramentorum assertionem." . . . 

This encomium of Henry s ability is confirmed by 
Speed in his "History of Great Britain/ * where he 
says of Henry: "His youth so trained up in literature 
that he was accounted the most learned Prince of all 
Christendom, indued with parts most befitting a 
king. . . . 

"His Councellors hee chose of the gravest Divines, 
and the wisest nobility, with whom hee not onely often 
sate, to the great encrease of his politicke experience," 
etc., etc. 

And Hutton, in his "Sir Thomas More," says that 
among such chosen ones the lovable, religious More was 
the favourite. His words are :f "So from time to time 
was he [More] by the Prince [Henry VIII. ] advanced, 
continuing in his singular favour and trusty service 
twenty years and above. A good part whereof used the 
King upon holidays, when he had done his own devo 
tions, to send for him into his travers, and there some 
time in matters of Astronomy, Geometry, Divinity, 
and such other Faculties, and sometime in his worldly 
affairs, to sit and confer with him." 

*Pp. 982, 983. IP. 93. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 73 

Paradoxical as it may seem, we might say that even 
after death More affords testimony to Henry s author 
ship, for to the tomb of More was affixed an inscription 
composed by Erasmus, and in it Henry VIII. is 
spoken of: "To whom alone of all kings the hitherto 
unheard of glory has happened that he should be 
deservedly called the Defender of the Faith/ and he 
has proven himself to be such both by the sword and 
the pen."* 

Moreover, in More s reply to Luther in defence of 
Henry s "Assertio" Henry is spoken of as "Invictissi- 
mum Angliae Galliaeque regem, Henricum ejus nominis 
octavum, Fidei Defensorem, haud litteris minus quam 
regno clarum." As Henry was indeed a great king, 
probably in one sense the most influential England 
had ever seen, this statement of More surely im 
plies that Henry had written something more than 
ordinary letters that he was the author of the 

"When one sees the various MSS. in the British 
Museum," says Audin,f speaking of Henry, "it is im 
possible to doubt the theological attainments of the mon 
arch . . . who knew the Bible by rote." Henry s al 
leged inability as a Latinist has been made an argument 
against the possibility of his having written the "As 
sertio," but the following will show that Henry was 
quite proficient in this language, surely enough to have 
written the simple Latin of the "Assertio." First, as 
to his tutor and Latin master, Tytler^: says : 

*See Erasmi Opera, III., pars 2, col. 1441, Epistola MCCXXIIL, 
Thomas MorusErasmo Roterodamo : " Tabula afflxa ad sepulchrum 
Thomse Mori. . . . Ab invictissimo Rege, Henrico octavo, cui uni 
Regum omnium gloria prius inaudita contigit, ut fidei defensor, 
qualem et gladio se et calamo vere prcutitit, merito vocaretur." 

fHenry VIII., pp. 91, 92, note e. JHenry yill., p. 29. 

74: Authorship of the "Assertio" 

"Linacre, a man infinitely superior to Andre [Ar 
thur s tutor], who had studied the purest models in 
Italy, was afterwards selected by Henry the Eighth as 
his own master; but the monarch, although an able 
Latinist, does not appear to have made much progress 
in the other language" [Greek] . 

Although perhaps a bit flattering, yet the following 
testimonial to Henry s ability and even fluency in Latin 
is very interesting, coming as it does from no less a per 
sonage than Giustinian, the Venetian ambassador at 
the court of Henry VIII. He says:* "His majesty 
[Henry VIII.] is twenty-nine years old and extremely 
handsome ; nature could not have done more for him ; 
. . . he is very accomplished ; . . . speaks good French, 
Latin, and Spanish; is very religious; hears three 
Masses daily when he hunts, and sometimes five on 
other days ; he hears the office every day in the Queen s 
chamber, that is to say, vespers and compline." 

Id. p. 77, fol. Letter of Secretary of Sebastian Gius 
tinian, Knight Ambassador in England, to Alvise Fos- 
cari, May, 1515 : "His Majesty [Henry VIII. ] sent for 
the ambassadors, and addressed their magnificences, 
partly in French and partly in Latin, as also in 

Id. p. 86, Giustinian s letter saying of Henry VIII. : 
"He speaks French, English and Latin, and a little 

"To the Council of Ten, London, July 3, 1515: 

"The King [Henry VIII. ] answered us very suit 
ably in Latin/ . . . 

In general, several quotations of the King speaking 
Latin, or quoting Scripture in Latin, are given in this 
same work.f 

*Vol. I., pp. 26,27. 
tld., p. 101. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 75 

Probably basing his remarks on the authority of 
Giustinian, Brewer, in his "Keign of Henry VIII.,"* 
says: "He [Henry VIII. ] spoke French, Italian, and 
Spanish. Of his proficiency in Latin a specimen 
has been preserved among the letters of Erasmus. 
All suspicion of its genuineness is removed by the 
positive assertion of Erasmus, that he had seen 
the original and corrections in the Prince s own 
hand. 7 

Jeremy Collierf agrees with and even adds to these 
statements, saying: "He was a very promising prince, 
both as to person, capacity, and improvement. . . . His 
genius was lively, and his education push d, and well 
managed ; for besides the customary exercises and accom 
plishments of a prince, he had made considerable ad 
vances in learning. He was a good Latinist, a philoso 
pher and divine ; and as for music, his progress in that 
science was so unusual, that two entire Masses of his own 
composing were sung in his chapel. His inclination to 
letters was early perceived, and if his elder brother had 
lived, tis said his father design d him for the see of 

To add to this and recount briefly what many other 
weighty writers have said on the subject, Lilly, in his 
"Renaissance Types," saysj of Henry : "He was highly 
educated, according to the standard of the times ; a good 
Latin scholar, well versed in theology, the scholastic 
philosophy and the canon law." 

John Richard Green, in his "History of the Eng 
lish People," says: "He was a trained theologian and 

*Vol. I., p. 4. 

fEccles. Hist, of Gt. Britain, Part II., Bk. I., beginning. 
JCh. VI., p. 328. 

Vol. II., p. 124. See also A. L. Moore, Lectures and Papers 
on the Reformation, p. 25. 

76 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

proud of his theological knowledge." He "liked the soci 
ety of men of letters."* 

"He received the benefit of as learned an education as 
the age could bestow, the King [Henry VII. ] con 
templating his accession to the primacy of England."f 

Thomson, in his "Memoirs of the Court of Henry 
VIII.," says :$ "The instructions bestowed upon Prince 
Henry by his preceptor, Skelton, were calculated to ren 
der him a scholar and a churchman, rather than an en 
lightened legislator. He was tutored in the philosophy 
of the schools, especially the Aristotelian, then the most 
in credit with the learned ; he was skilled in the Latin. 
. . . To theological studies Henry devoted his atten 
tion in early life with ardour, and with success ; at least 
this part of his attainments is not to be despised, since 
it enabled him in after times to procure for himself and 
his successors the title of Defender of the Faith." 

Beckett, in his "English Keformation," says: "He 
[Henry] had been carefully educated by good scholars, 
and he believed himself to be a special master of theol- 


Henry William Herbert, in his "Memoirs of Henry 
VIIL,"|| says: "He had been studiously educated a 
theologian ; ... he really was more than a tolerable di 
vine." Again :fl "Henry VIII. . . . received a 
learned education. Having been destined for the 
Church, he had studied the writings of Aquinas and cul 
tivated a taste for controversial divinity, which sharp 
ened his intellect." 

*Lilly, Renaissance, Ch. III., p. 135. 

fSir Thomas More, W. J. Walter, Baltimore, p. 29. 

JVol. I, p. 218. 

Ch. XV. 

gP. 121. 

YTytler, Henry VIII., p. 111. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 77 

]N~ot only had Henry had able schoolmasters and 
wisely selected studies to make him a theologian, but he 
had profited by the opportunities and delighted to use 
his powers: "He was fond of learned discussions and 
scholastic sophistry."* 

James Gairdner, in his "English Church in the Six 
teenth Century,"f says : 

"From early days Henry had shown a taste for theo 
logical discussion, and the story that his father had in 
tended once to make him Archbishop of Canterbury is 
not at all incredible. In 1518, as we learn from Eras 
mus and some allusions in State papers, he composed a 
treatise on the question whether vocal prayer was neces 
sary to a Christian. . . . Indeed, putting tradition 
aside, we know quite well that Henry VIII. had all his 
days a taste for theological subtleties, and probably could 
not have done the things he did but that he was fully 
competent to argue points of course with most royal 
persuasiveness against Tunstall, Latimer, Cranmer, 
and any divine in his kingdom." 

Overton, in his "Church in England,":}: says : 

"His abilities and attainments were so much above 
the average that long before he had reached the prime of 
life, he could contend on equal terms with the ablest 
and most learned writers of the day." 

Samuel Gardiner, in his "English History for Stu 
dents," || says Henry "took a real interest in learning." 

*Hausser, Period of the Reformation, Vol. I., p. 212. 

fPp. 78 and 5. 

JVol. I., p. 335. 

" More writes to Erasmus in the early part of Henry s reign, 
when he had become connected with the court : Such is the virtue 
and learning of the King, and his daily increasing progress in both, 
that the more I see him increase in these kingly ornaments, the 
less troublesome the courtier s life becomes to me. " 

I By Mullinger, p. 105. 

78 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

This seems true of even his youngest days, for Erasmus 
was "presented to Henry VIII., then a boy of nine 
years old, who asks for a tribute of verses, afterwards 
duly paid. . . . He came back to England again, in the 
hope, which proved delusive, of patronage and employ 
ment from the young Henry VIII., in whose love of 
learning all humanists put their trust."* And yet he 
was sometimes more generous in reward of literary ef 
fort, for the "Censura Literaria"f says: "And King 
Henry the Eighth . . . for a few psalmes of David 
turned into English meetre by Sternbold, made him 
groome of his privy chamber and gave him many other 
good gifts." 

" Henry had been educated to some extent in the new 
learning. "$ No wonder, then, that "there was a mo 
ment in the reign of Henry VIII. when it appeared not 
impossible that English scholars might, north of the 
Alps, lead the van in the restoration of the new learn 
ing. . . . King Henry, too, was within an ace of gath 
ering into our libraries those treasures of Greek manu 
script which Francis I. secured and placed at Fontaine- 

Naturally enough, "the Classicists might expect 
everything from one who at nine years old had written 
good Latin, uncorrected by tutors, the church reformers 
from a prince with so strong a turn for theology." || 

And he was practical, preparing the way, laying a 
foundation in the young by establishing lower schools at 
the same time that he encouraged the universities. In 
deed he had the most recent American ideas of educa- 

*Martin Luther and the Reformation in Germany, Charles 
Beard, p. 87. 

fVol. I., p. 342. 

jOxford Reformers of 1498, Sebohm, p. 124. 

01d English Bible, Gasquet, p. 314. 

|The Early Tudors, Moberly, p. 100. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 79 

tion that of subsidizing students to go abroad to study, 
as we learn from Collier :* 

"Henry founded a great many grammar schools ; . . . 
he likewise founded lectures in both universities, where 
those who read in the faculties of divinity, law and 
physic were encouraged with a considerable settlement. 
The same countenance was likewise given to professors 
of Greek and Hebrew. . . . He built and endowed the 
famous Trinity College in Cambridge. . . . Lastly, he 
maintained a great many young scholars in foreign 

The brightest star of the new learning was Erasmus, 
and this star is drawn to be a satellite of Henry and 
to sound his praises and declare that he believed Henry 
truly to be the author of the "Assertio." Worsleyf says 
of him in connection with the "Assertio" : 

"Erasmus believed, or affected to believe, that Henry 
himself was parent and author. 7 His father/ he 
[Erasmus] wrote, was a man of the nicest judgment; 
his mother possessed the soundest intellect, etc. When 
the King was no more than a child he was sent to 
study. But whoever will take up Erasmus s own 
works will see that he praises Henry s ability, as well as 
his actual work, implying that Henry wrote the "As 
sertio/ and answering objections against the King s au 
thorship, by denying any help from his Erasmus s 
hands, either as to matter or style. Here are his words : 

"Tom. iii us ., Pars l a , col. 7. Epistola X. Guliel- 
mus Montjoius Erasmo Roterodamo S. D. 

"Verum si scias^: . . . quam sapienter se gerat . . . 
quod studium in literatos prse se ferat. . . . Foster Rex 

*Pt. II , Bk. III., p. 214. 
fDawn of the Reformation, p. 160, note. 

JDesiderii Erasmi Roterodami Opera Omnia. Lugduni Bata- 
vorum, cura et impensis Petri Van der Aa, MDCCIII. 

80 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

non aurum, non gemmas, non metella, Bed virtutem, sed 
gloriam, sed seternitatem concupiscit." 

Id. col. 145, Erasmus calls Henry "aurei saeculi 

Id. col. 187, he says of Henry, "Nee ipse literarum 

Id. col. 253, Erasmus writes to Henry: "Nullus tibi 
pene dies abeat, in quo non aliquam temporis portionem 
libris evolvendis iinpertias, cumque priscis illis sapien- 
tibus colloqui gaudeas." . . . 

Id. col. 402, Erasmus to Paul Bombasius says of 
Henry, "bonis libris delectatur." 

Id. col. 440, Erasmus to Henry, Antwerp, May 15, 
1519 : "Et tamen in literis quas olim, felicissime degus- 
tavit tua majestas, . . . ut eruditissimis etiam theologis 
miraculo sit sanitas et acumen ingenii tui. Siquidem in 
disputatione, quam nuper animi causa tua majestas in- 
stituit cum acutissimo sirnul et doctissimo theologo, de- 
fendans. . . . Quis invenire poterat argutius? quis col- 
ligere nervosius? quis explicare venustius." 

Id. col. 463, Erasmus writes to Jacob Banisius: 
"Triumpharent bonse liters, si Principem haberemus 
domi, qualem habet Anglia. Rex ipse non indoctus, 
turn ingenio acerrimo, palam tuetur bonas literas, rabu- 
lis omnibus silentium indixit. . . . Aula Regis plus 
habet hominum eruditione prsestantium, quam ulla 
Academia." Bruxellis, 21 Junii, anno 1519. 

Id. col. 533, Erasmus to John Faber, Vicar of the 
Bishop of Constance, writes : "Ipse Rex felicissime phil- 
osophatur. Regina literas amat, quas ab infantia felici- 
ter didicit." 

Id. col. 660, Erasmus writes to Richard Pace: "Li- 
~brum, quern Regia majestas conscripsit adversus Luther^ 
um f vidi tantum in manibus Marini nuncii Apostolici. 
Vehementer aveo legere. Nee enim dubito quin dig- 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 81 

nus sit illo longe felicissiino ingenio, quod mire valet, 
ubicunque sese intenderit. . . . Henricus octavus in 
genio, calamoque propugnat pro Christi sponsa. . . . 
Porro, confido fore ut hoc pulcherrimum planeque ra- 
rissimum exemplar multos principes provocet ad semula- 
tionem. An non pudebit post hoc sacerdotes, monachos, 
episcopos nihil scire rei theologicse, quum viderint Re- 
gem tantum juvenem, tot negociis districtum, eo pro- 
gressum in cognitione sacrarum Literarum, ut libris edi- 
tis periclitanti Christiana religioni patrocinetur ?" 
Brugis, 23 Augusti, 1521. 

Id. col. 732, Erasmus Roterodami Georgio duci 
Saxonise. "In scholasticorum theologorum libris versari 
gaudet, et in conviviis aliquid de re theologica disserere 
solitus est. Nonnunquam in multam noctem profertur 
contentio literata. Habet Reginam eleganter doctam. 
Quod si qua in parte fuisset adjutus in eo libro, nihil 
erat opus meis auxiliis, quum aulam habeat eruditis- 
simis pariter ac eloquentissimis viris differtam. Quod si 
stylus habet aliquid non abhorrens a meo, nihil mirum 
aut novum, quum ille puer studiose volverit meas lucu- 
brationes." . . . 

Lastly, among the proofs showing in a general way 
Henry s ability to have written the "Assertio," are the 
records of his interest in, and use of, books. Although 
these instances occurred some years later and in an 
other connection, yet they may fairly be adduced as in 
dicating his trend of mind and ability. There are 
many entries for books brought to King Henry VIII., 
or inventories of books, or books bound for him, or 
for vellum, etc., told of in detail in ~N. H. Nicolas s 
"Privy Purse Expenses of King Henry VIII."* 

And now for the more definite and formal statements 
of Henry s authorship, though it is difficult to draw a line 
"London, 1827. 

82 Authorship of the "Asseriio" 

accurately separating these many witnesses into distinct 

D Aubigne, in his "Reformation," says:* "Henry 
the Eighth had just composed a book against the monk 
of Wittemburg. 

"The King himself was no stranger to the Romish 
doctrines. Indeed, it would appear that if Arthur had 
lived, Henry would have been destined to the archiepis- 
copal see of Canterbury. Thomas Aquinas, St. Bona- 
venture, tournaments, fetes, Elizabeth Blount, and other 
court ladies, were all mingled together in the thoughts 
of this monarch, while masses of his own composition 
were being sung in his chapel. . . . He searched 
through Thomas Aquinas, Peter Lombard, Alexander 
de Hale, and Bonaventure." 

"Doubtless the King consulted with others, chiefly 
with Fisher, but there is no reason to doubt that the 
work was substantially his own."f 

Hutton, in his " Sir Thomas More,":): has an original 
and interesting statement: "As early as 1518 Henry 
VIII. had been preparing a book against the heretics, 
which, if the conjecture of Mr. Brewer be correct, was 
the original draft of the attack upon Luther, published in 
1521. It was natural that Pace and More should be 
frequently consulted during the progress of this work, 
but it does not appear that they took any actual part in 
the authorship, their aid extending at most to the com 
position and correction of the Latin style." 

The following from Lord Herbert of Cherbury is 
about as strong and clear a declaration of Henry s au 
thorship as could be asked : 

*Translated by Gill, Part m., Oh. IV. 

fCreighton, History of the Papacy, pp. 168, 164, note 8. 

JP. 196, ed. London, 1895. 

^England under Henry VIII. , published by Murray, London, 1870. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 83 

^Besides his being an able Latinist, philosopher and 
divine he was ... a curious musician." (P. 110.) 

"Our King thereupon compiles a book, wherein he 
strenuously opposes Luther in the point of indulgences, 
number of sacraments, the papal authority, and other 
particulars, to be seen in that his work, entitled De 
Sept. Sacramentis ; a principal copy whereof, richly 
bound, being sent to Leo, I remember myself to have 
seen in the Vatican Library." (P. 199.) 

Dodd,* in his "Church History of England," 
says: "They [the clergy consulted about Henry s 
divorce] appealed to his own book against Luther," 

In the "Annals or General Chronicle of England, 
begun by John Stow, by Edmund Howes, Gent.,"f it 
is said: 

"King Henry wrote a book against Luther in Ger 
many and therefore Pope Leo the Tenth named him 
Defender of the faith. To the which book Luther an 
swered very sharply, nothing sparing his authority or 

In Burners "Reformation":): it is said: "When 
King Henry wrote this book of the seven sacraments it- 
seems it was at first desired to send it over in manu 
script," etc. 

Arthur Mason, in his "Lectures on Colet, Fisher and 
More," says: "Henry VIIL, who was well read in 
theology for a layman of those days, had been negotiat 
ing at Rome for some complimentary title. ... He 
composed, the next year [1521], a work on the seven 
sacraments against Luther." 

*Vol. I., p. 95, col. 1, Bruweli, 1787. 
fLondini, impensis Ricardl Meighen, 1681, p. 514. 
tPart III., Bk. I., 18, Oxford, 1865. 
P. 81. 

84: Authorship of the "Assertio" 

Bossuet speaks of "Henry VIII., King of England, 
who refuted his [Luther s] book."* 

Kohrbacher declares flatly :f "Le roi d Angleterre, 
Henri VIII., fit plus encore; 1 anne suivante (1521) il 
composa lui-meme une defense des sept sacrements 
contre Fouvrage de Luther, de la Captivite de Baby 

Moberly says::j: "Before the end of 1521 Henry 
VIII. wrote his book on the Seven Sacraments. . . . 
The King . . . was stimulated to authorship." 

Audin graphically expresses the situation : a Closeted 
with his chancellor, the archbishop of York; with 
Fisher, bishop of Rochester, and other prelates, he 
wrote the Defence of the Seven Sacraments." 

"Henry was at the acme of animation while defend 
ing the Papacy." 1 1 

In Seckendorf s "History of Lutheranism" we 
read :fl "Rescivit etiam, Henricum VIII. Anglise regem 
pulchrum librum a se pro septem sacramentorum de- 
f ensione, adversus tractatumLutheri decaptivitateBaby- 
lonica conscriptum pontifici misisse, quo meritus est, 
ut condita ob id bulla gloriosum defensoris fidei titu- 
lum acciperet." . . . 

Another source says:** "Ayant dans sa jeunesse 
etudie les sciences pour embrasser Tetat ecclesiastique, 
a une epoque ou vivait encore son frere aine, il voulut 
donner au monde une preuve de son merite scientifique 

*History of the Variations of the Protestant Church, Kenedy, 
1896, Vol. I., p. 47. 

tHist. Univ. de I tiglise Oath., XII., 105. 

^Epochs of Mod. Hist., Early Tudors, p. 151. 

gAudin s Luther, Vol. II., p. 50, in Alzog s Universal Ch. Hist., 
III., p. 62. 

flAudin, Henry VIII., p. 91. 

IfComment. de Lutheranismo, lib. I., CXII. 

**Price, Vol. I., p. 13, quotes Lingard, VI. , 142. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 85 

dans une cause si celebre. II composa done un livre 
savant centre beaucoup des propositions erronees de 
Martin Luther, le fit presenter au pontife en consis- 
toire le second jour d octobre, par son ambassadeur, et 
le termina par ce distique, dont nous n avons pas a juger 
le merite : 

Anglorum rex Henricus, Leo decime, 
Hoc opus, et fidei testem, et amicitise. 


This statement is found in Price s "Nonconformity," 
taken from Lingard:* "After all, the probability is 
that the basis of the work was supplied by Henry ; . . . 
his explicit assertion of the fact, in his reply to Luther s 
answer, requires an admission to this extent. Had it 
been wholly the work of others the King would scarcely 
have ventured so open an assertion of his authorship." 

Gairdner in the "Dictionary of National Biography," 
article "Henry VIII.," says : "As an author, Henry was 
by no means contemptible. His book against Luther 
( Assertio Septem Sacramentorum, published in 1521) 
was a scholastic performance of a rather conventional 
type, but it was the coinage of his own brain." 

A rich and rare old book is Polydore Vergil s "His 
tory of England." In it we read :f 

"Quocirca Henricus rex, qui habebat regnum suum 
maxime omnium religiosum, veritus ne uspiam labes 
aliqua religionis fieret, primum libros Lutheranos, 
quorum magnus jam numerus pervenerat in manus 
suorum Anglorum, comburendos curavit, deinde libel- 
lum contra earn doctrinam luculenter composuit, misit- 
que ad Leonem Pontificem. Delectavit multum opus 

*Price, Vol. I., p. 18, quotes Lingard, VI., 142. 
fPolydori Vergilii Urbinatis. Anglise Histories Libri Viginti- 
septem, Henrici VIII., lib. XXVII. 

86 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

Leonis animum, partim quia plenum erat ipsius defen* 
sionis causse, partim vero ob tale patronum consecutus 
foret, qui librum sua auctoritate probavit, legendumque 
decrevit, ac ut memoria tam grati beneficii aliquo 
nomine perpetuaretur, turn Henricum regem deferv- 
sorem fidei appellavit, quo ille deinceps titulo usus 

Audin gives a graphic picture of the inside history 
of the making of the "Assertio": "Henry, divested of 
the insignia of royalty, shut up in his study, was spend 
ing the night in consulting the great doctors of the 
Catholic schools."* As to the style, the same author 
says :f "The formal language of the schools might have 
crippled him, and consequently Skelton s pupil cast 
it off, and fell back on ancient history, for it was highly 
necessary that Luther should be aware that Henry knew 
something more than the Summa of St. Thomas," 
for "... he knew the Bible by rote.":): 

"Henry repeatedly amused his friends by reading to 
them portions of his MSS. More was one of his favour 
ites, but he did not always flatter his royal master. 
Your Grace should be guarded in your expressions/ re 
marked More one day, for the Pope, as a temporal sov 
ereign, may one day be opposed to England, and here is 
a passage wherein you exalt the authority of the Holy 
See to too high a pitch, and which Home would surely 
adduce in case of a rupture/ !N"o, no/ rejoined 
Henry, that expression is by no means too strong, 
nothing can equal my devotion to the Holy See, and no 
language can be sufficiently expressive, in my opinion, 
to speak my sentiments. But, Sire, do you not remem 
ber certain articles in the Prsemunire What matter/ 

*Henry VIII.,p. 88. 
fP. 90, id. op. 
$P. 91, id. op. 

AuthorMp of th* "Aseertio" 87 

retorted Henry, do I not hold my crown from the Holy 

See? "* 

So that Henry s views, private whims even, are ex 
pressed in the "Assertio," and that without brooking 
the censnre of even his nearest counsellor. 

Seebohm, in his "Era of the Protestant ^Revolution," 
says: "Whilst the Diet of Worms was sitting, he 
[Henry] wrote his celebrated book against Luther and 
in defence of the divine authority of the Pope, for do 
ing which the Pope rewarded him with the title of De 
fender of the Faith. " 

Natalis Alexander speaks of the Pope s rewarding 
Henry for having written the book in the following 
terms: "Henricum VIII. Anglise Regem, ob egregium 
Librum contra Martini Lutheri Hseresim editum, il- 
lustri titulo Defengoris Fidei donavit, Diplomate dato 
quinto idus Octobris ejusdem anni (1521). Has con- 
stitutiones et diplomat a legere est Tom II Bullarii."f 

Pallavicini most briefly says of Henry: "II com- 
posa done un livre savant.":): Though Sample, in his 
"Beacon Lights of the Reformation," is as short, de 
claring that Henry "sat down and wrote a book." 

Milner, in his "History of the Church of Christ," 
says that Henry "wrote in Latin his book on the seven 
sacraments." 1 1 

Hergenroether, in his "Histoire de PEglise," Tome 
V., p. 246, says: "II fit presenter son ouvrage a 
Leon X." 

Charles Butler declares that "considering his theo 
logical and classical education it is not to be wondered 

*Henry VIII., p. 92. 

fHistoria, Vol. IX., p. 28. 

JTrente, Tome I. , col. 675. Migne, 1844. 

P. 199. 

|Vol. V., p. 161. 

88 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

at that the spirit of authorship should fall upon the 
monarch; or that he should choose for his subject a 
theological theme. 7 * More indirectly Janssen, in his 
"History of the German People," says: "So, too, the 
King of England vaunts himself that he is a protector 
of the Christian Church and people."f 

So that really one could hardly ask for more or 
weightier testimonies than these presented, declaring 
that Henry wrote composed was the author of the 
"Assertio." Let it not be forgotten, however, that there 
are those who qualify somewhat the sense of the word 
"author"; for while Hallam says::): "Henry had 
acquired a fair portion of theological learning, and on 
reading one of Luther s treatises, was not only shocked 
at its tenets, but undertook to refute them in a formal 
answer," yet a foot-no te qualifies this, particularly 
in regard to the diction : "From Henry s general charac 
ter and proneness to theological discussion it may be in 
ferred that he had at least a considerable share in the 
work, though probably with the assistance of some who 
had more command of the Latin language." 

Then, too, in Allies s "History of England,"|| it is 
said : 

"The pen at least was Henry s own, and did the work 
well. Sir Thomas More furnished it with an index, 
which was his sole part in the book. ... As far as 
genuine authorship went Henry had fairly won his hon 
ours. He possessed sufficient theological knowledge and 
acumen to explain the seven sacraments dogmatically. 

*Historical Memoirs respecting the English, Irish and Scottish 
Catholics, Vol. I., p. 23. 
fVol.IV., pp. 41, 42. 
^Constitutional History, p. 44. 
Id. op., p. 80. 
IP. 13. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 89 

. . . His example belied his pen." And yet this is 
but a slight qualification of the term. 

Du Pin does not say Henry actually wrote it, but that 
he might have :* 

"Henry VIII., King of England, made most rigorous 
Acts to hinder the heresy [of Luther] from coming into 
his realm. This prince did something more to show his 
zeal for religion and the Holy See, for he caused to be 
made in his own name a treatise about the Seven Sacra 
ments. . . . But Henry VIII. might very well write 
it, having studied divinity in his younger years." 

Pocock s Burnet s "Reformation" gives a good argu 
ment in favour of Henry s authorship ; at first stating an 
objection, but then also an answer to it :f 

"It was also a masterpiece in Wolsey to engage the 
King to own that the book against Luther was written 
by him, in which the secret of those who, no doubt, had 
the greatest share in composing it was so closely laid, 
that it never broke out. Seckendorf tells us, that Lu 
ther believed it was written by Lee, who was a zealous 
Thomist, and had been engaged in disputes with Eras 
mus, and was afterwards made Archbishop of York. 
If any of those who still adhered to the old doctrines 
had been concerned in writing it, probably, when they 
saw King Henry depart from so many points treated of 
in it, they would have gone beyond sea, and have robbed 
him of that false honour and those excessive praises 
which that book had procured him." 

If Luther assailed Henry so, he must have been the 
author of the "Assertio," or at least been believed such 
by Luther, for Luther would hardly attack the King of 
England unless he believed it to have been Henry who 

*Ecclesiastical History of the Sixteenth Century, Bk. II., Ch. 

fVol. III., p. 171. 

90 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

truck at him in the "Assertio." If Henry were not 
the author, Luther would probably have heard, at least 
by a secret hint from England, but yet, a a few years 
afterwards," when Luther began to suspect that the 
King was not indisposed to favour his opinions, he 
wrote to him to excuse the violence and abuse con 
tained in his book, which he attributed to the advice of 

Indeed, Du Pin saysf that "the King of England 
was chiefly angry because he [Luther] had said that his 
book upon the Sacraments was made by another, and 
put out in his name. 7 . . . 

The case is summed up thus by Lingard, in his "His 
tory of England" 4 "That the treatise in defence of the 
Seven Sacraments, which the King published, was his 
own composition, is forcibly asserted by himself; that 
it was planned, revised and improved by the superior 
judgment of the cardinal and the bishop of Rochester, 
was the opinion of the publick." 

As for the author, then, of the "Assertio," it must be 
admitted that there are some difficult objections and 
weighty names against Henry s having written it ; that 
not all of these objections have been satisfactorily an 
swered, and by the very nature and circumstances 
of the case they could not be answered. However, the 
great weight of the evidence is decidedly on the side of 
Henry s claim. Certainly, he approved and claimed the 
work and in this sense no one will deny his author 
ship. Very probably he selected and composed the ma- 

*Roscoe s Leo X., Vol. II., p. 231, note 168. 

fBk. II., Ch. XVIII. 

tVol. IV., p. 466. 

" Sir Thomas More confirms this opinion by saying that by his 
grace s appointment, and consent of the makers of the same, he was 
only a sorter-out and placer of the principal matters therein con 
tained. See a note on this subject by Mr. Bruce, Arch., XXIV., 67." 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 91 

terials. Indeed, it if quite likely that the rerj ityle is 
Henry s. 

V. And now, in the fifth place, here are several sum- 
mings up of the arguments for Henry s authorship. 

J. M. Brown, in the "Transactions of the Koyal His 
torical Society," VIII., says that "we have the opinion 
of Erasmus (Jortin s Erasmus, Vol. I., p. 254 and fol.) 
that the King was capable of writing as good Latin as 
was contained in the disputed book." He quotes Lord 
Herbert of Cherbury (Hist, of H. VIIL, fol. 85) as 
saying: "Henry was so associated with St. Thomas 
Aquinas as to be nicknamed Thomisticus." 

"All those who could know anything about what was 
doing at court say that the book was the King s, with 
qualifications. If any one knew who wrote the Assertio 
Fisher must have, and he says in the Defense of the 
Assertio, We may here remark the wonderful ingenu 
ity of the King s mind. 

"The only man besides the King whom we know 
positively to have had any hand in the book is More, 
the sorter-out and placer. " (P. 257.) Thus far 

In the "Archseologia," Ellis quotes from John Bruce 
and sums up a number of the weightiest reasons for 
Henry s authorship. He says:* "There is very little 
evidence upon which the authorship of this volume can 
be assigned to any particular person. . . . On the part 
of those who maintain the King s proper authorship 
there are : The book itself, and the King s reply to Lu 
ther s letter to him, in both of which the whole merit is 
assumed by the King. On this side of the question may 
also be produced the authority of Polydore Vergil 
(Angl. Hist, p. 664, edit. 1570); Speed (Hist., 
p. 759, edit. 1611) ; Fisher, who published a defence 
*P. 67 and fol. 

92 Authorship of the "Assertio" 

of the work, and attributes it to the King of England 
not less famous in arms than in letters (Defensio Reg. 
Ass. dedicat); Herbert (Life of Henry VIII., p. 94, 
ed. 1672) ; Holinshed, who . . . does not seem to im 
peach Henry s authorship (Vol. II., p. 872, edit. 1587) ; 
Strype (Eccles. Mem., Vol. I., p. 33) and many other 
authors, who treat the Assertio as the work of him 
whose name it bears, without even mentioning any 
rumour of a doubt upon the subject. 

"The circumstances under which the book was 
written . . . will be found to support Henry s claim 
to the authorship. 

"Pace, in a letter addressed to Wolsey (Cotton MSS. 
Vitellus, B, IV., No. 59), dated 15th April without 
any year, but evidently written in 1521, gives an ac 
count of an interview he had that day had with the 
King. Pace found his Majesty lokyng upon a book 
of Luther s, and upon such dispraise as his Grace did 
give unto the said book, Pace took occasion to deliver 
a Bull which he had lately brought from Rome. . . . 

"The King remarked that it was joyous to have this 
tidings from the Pope s Holiness at such time, as he 
had taken upon him the defence of Christ s Church, 
with his penne. . . . The King promised to take more 
pain to make an end of his book within a specified 

"In a letter from Wolsey to Clerk the Cardinal tells 
of what pain, labour, and studie his Highness hath 
taken in devising and making a book for the confutacion 
of his [Luther s] said erroneous opinions; . . . the 
said booke is by his Highness perfected; . . . the 
King s Highness has this [way] declared himself as the 
veray defender of Catholique faith [of] Crist s 
Churche as well w* his preysence as w* his lernyng. 

So far Ellis s summary. 

Authorship of the "Assertio" 93 

Lewis, in his "Fisher,"* by way of summing up the 
argument for Henry s authorship of the "Assertio" says 

I. Henry in his letter to Luther owns it to be his. 

II. More to Cromwell says he knows it to be by 
Henry s own pen and that "in the composition of it he 
was governed by his own sentiment." 

III. Erasmus says : (a) "he could never find out by 
whose labour the King was assisted;" (6) "that the 
phrase was his own" [Henry s] ; (c) "that he had a 
happy and ready genius for everything ;" (d) "that but 
a few years before he wrote a theological disputation on 
the question whether a lay-man was obliged to vocal 
prayer ;" (e) "and took delight in the books of the 
school divines, and would often at meals discourse on 
subjects in divinity." 

So that while it is not a settled question, yet, con 
sidering Henry s own statements, those of others con 
nected with the "Assertio," Henry s other works, and 
the statements of very many historians, it is more 
probable that Henry wrote, composed, was the author of 
.the "Assertio." Not that he had no help, took no coun 
sel, consulted no one (though it is known how he re 
jected More s advice about the strong praise and divine 
origin Henry attributed to the Primacy of the Pa 
pacy), but, as Mr. Overtonf says of the "Assertio": 
"It at any rate expressed Henry s sentiments and he 
was quite competent to write it." 

*P. 109. 

j-Church in England, Vol. I., p. 857. 

J6&ition$ anb IDersione 

IT is of primary interest to know where the " As 
sert io" has appeared in print; and, first of all, where 
the original that Henry sent Leo now is. 

Roscoe* answers the query. He says: "The original 
in an elegant MS. is still preserved in the Library of 
the Vatican, and is usually shown to Englishmen on 
their visits to Rome. Vide Dr. Smith s Tour of the 
Continent/ Vol. II., p. 200." 

Strypef tells us of the book : "This book the King, by 
the Cardinal s advice, thought fit to have presented to 
Pope Leo. . . . This was brought about by the means 
of Cardinal Wolsey; who procured some copies of the 
book to be written in a very fair and beautiful charac 
ter; and one of them to be bound up splendidly, 
namely, that that was to be sent to the Pope; and the 
said Cardinal sent that especially to the King, for his 
liking of it, before it went." 

Perhaps no less interesting is what Rohrbacher 
writes :$ "C est un beau volume in quarto sur velin, ecrit 
par une calligraphe d une rare habilete. Le roi se fait 
peindre sur la premiere page du manuscrit ; il est dans 
1 attitude de la devotion, a genoux; Leon X, sur son 
trone, semble ecouter I enf ant qui vient offrir a son pere 
le livre qu il a compose pour la gloire du Christ. L acte 
d hommage est signe de la main du prince. A la fin du 
volume sont deux vers latins dont le sens est : Leon X ! 

*LeoX., p. 167. 

fjolm Strype, Ecclea. Memorials, Vol. I., p. 51. 

fHistoire Eccles., Vol. XII., p. 112. 

Editions and Versions 95 

Ce roi dee Anglais, Henri, vous envoie cet ouvrage, 
temoin de sa foi et de son amitieV . . . Un autograph 
du Pape Leo X, date de Saint Pierre, le 11 Octobre 
1521, et que Ton conserve dans les archives de la cour- 
onne d Angleterre, donne a Henri VIII et a ses suc- 
cesseurs le titre de Defenseur de la Foi." 

From this original an early copy was printed, as the 
following notices of Dibdin* show : 

"613. Assertio Septem Sacramentorum adversus 
Martin. Lutheru, etc. Apud inclytam urbem Londinum 
in aedibus Pynsonianis. An. MDXXI. Quarto Idus 
Julij. Cum privilegio a rege indulto. Quarto." 

To this Brunet addsif "Edition tres rare; la prem 
iere de cet ouvrage celebre ; . . . de 78 ff. . . . 

"Jos Van Praet en cite trois exemplaires imprimes 
sur velin." 

And to this again Watts:): adds a notice of apparently 
two other editions of the same year 1521, and in Lon 
don ; he says : "Et cum epistola ad Saxonire duces pie ad- 
monitoria. Lond. 1521, 4to;" and also: "Et cum 
summa indulgentiarum libellum ipsum legentibus con- 
cessarum. Lond. 1521, 4to." 

Dibdin gives us details of the contents of one of the 
London editions of 1521. He says: 

"615. Libello huic Regio insunt, etc. Apud in 
clytam urbem Londinum in sedibus Pynsonianis 
MDXXI. Quarto. 

"Herbert seems to have been indebted to Ames for the 
following account of this volume : 

*Typograph. Antiq., Vol. II., p. 484. See also Audin s Henry 
VIII., note to p. 92. Alzog, Univers. Church Hist., Vol. III., 
p. 82, note 8. Worsley s Dawn of the Reformation, p. 159, note. 

f Jacques Charles Brunet, Manuel du Libraire, Tome III., 
col. 100. 

JBlblioth. Britannica, Vol. I., Authors article Henry VIII., King. 

gTypograph. Antiq., Vol. II., p. 484. 

96 Editions and Versions 

" Libello huic regio haec insunt. 

" 1. Oratio Joannis Clerk apud Ko. pon. in exhibi- 
tione operis regii. 

" 2. Responsio roman. pont. ad eundem ex tempore 

" 3. Bulla ro. pon. ad regiam majestatem, pro ejus 
operis confirmatione. 

" 4. Summa indulgetiarum libellum ipsum regium 
legentibus, concessarum. 

" 5. Libellus regius adversus Martinum Lutherum 

" 6. Epistola regia ad illustrissimas saxonise duces 
pie admonitoria. The colophon as above. In the pub 
lic library, Cambridge." 

Lastly, Thomson says* of this 1521 London edition: 
"It was printed in 1521 by Kichard Pynson, in 
FEENCH, in Latin and in English, by order of the 

So much for the publications of the "Assertio" that 
year in London; down in Rome Brunetf says it was 
printed, and an indulgence of ten years and ten quaran 
tines was granted the readers of it. Here are his words : 
"Panni les nombreuses reimpressions qui ont ete faites 
de cette refutation de Luther, une de plus rares, et sans 
doute la plus remarquable, est celle de Rome, opera 
Steph. Guilliereti, 1521, in 4, dont le titre porte: Li- 
brum hunc Anglise regis fidei defensoris . . . legenti 
bus, decem annorum et totidem XL indulgentia apos- 
tolica authoritate concessa est. 

Panzer, "Annales Typographici," also mentions this 
edition of Rome 1521 as in quarto. 

I may add that a recent catalogue of second-hand 

*Court of Henry VIII., Vol. I., p. 381, note. 
fManuel du Libraire, Tome III., col. 100. 

Editions and Versions 97 

books rates a copy of this edition at 130 lire, though 
Lowndes* mentions one sold for 3. 13. 6. 

In 1522 there were several editions. Lowndesf 
and BrunetJ mention one in 4to of this date in 

Lowndes and Roscoe|| speak of one at Antwerp, the 
former (Lowndes) saying it was in 4to. The catalogue 
of the British Museum says this edition was printed by 
Hillen (see "Henry VIIL"). 

Lowndes,1f Dibdin** and the "Bibliotheca Eras- 
miana"f f tell of one of the same year at Strasburg with 
a commendatory epistle by Erasmus; Lowndes adds 
that Archbishop Warham also commended it. Dibdin 
and the "Bibliotheca Erasmiana" say it was in 4to ; and 
the "Bibliotheca" also says of it: "cum registro nuper 

Dibdin further says that Ames speaks of an edition 
"at Bruges by Erasmus," and that "Earl Spencer pos 
sesses a magnificent copy of this book, printed upon vel 
lum, with the title-page elegantly illuminated. I have 
seen an edition," he says, a of the date 1522, XVII Ka- 
lendas Eebruarij cum privilegio a rege indulto."^ 

Audin speaks of "two editions at Antwerp, with re 
prints at Frankfort, Cologne and many other places." 

A 1523 edition is spoken of by Lowndes,|||| no place 
given, in 4to, 1. 10. in price. Twenty years 
later it was published at Rome, according to Lingardfllf 

"Bibliographical Manual of English Literature, by Wm. T. 
Lowndes, London, 1859, Part IV., p. 1039. 
fOpus citat. **Loco cit. 

JOpus citat. ff3 e Serie, p. 28. 

Loco citato. #Op. cit., p. 485. 

I Leo X., loco citato. Henry VIII., p. 92, note e, 

IfLoco cit. II I Loco citato. 

flfHist. of England, IV., 468. 

98 Editions and Versions 

and Walter,* Koecoef adding that "From this" [i. e., 
the original copy sent to Leo X.] "copy it was printed 
at Rome, in sedibus Francisci Priscianensis Florentini, 
1543, as appears by the colophon." 

Eighteen years later at Lyons another edition was 
brought out by Gabriel de Saconay, "prsecenteur" of the 
cathedral at Lyons. The "Dictionnaire de Bibliogra 
phic Catholique" of Migne^ says: "Prsefixa est Gab. 
de Saconay praefatio: accedunt exempla litterum Hen- 
rici VIII. ad Lutherum, et Lutheri ad Henricum ; Lug- 
duni, Guill. Rovillius 1561, in 4to." And Lowndes 
calls it a "valuable historical preface." 

The editor has been able to locate only two copies of 
this edition, one in the British Museum and the other 
in the Vatican Pontifical Library respectively. From 
the latter he has had a manuscript copy made, and finds 
that, for the present purpose, out of the 84 pages of 
Saconay^s Preface p. Ixxi is the first after the title-page 
that speaks very distinctly of Henry s "Assertio." And 
on p. Ixxviiii he says that Henry s book had be 
come so scarce "quod jam pene de manibus omnium 
elapsum, et ab amico non obscura erga me benevolentia 
cornparatum, rursus in lucem emisi." 

The next year, 1562, it was printed at Paris by Will 
iam Desboys, in 12mo, "cui subnexa est ejusdem regia 
epistola, assertionis ipsius contra eumdem defensoria; 
accedit quoque P. Joan. Roffensis contra Lutheri 
captivitatem Babylonicam assertionis regise de- 

It may also be seen at the beginning of the "Opera" 

*8irThomas More, by W. J. Walter, published by Lucas, Baltimore. 

fLeo X., note 167. 

iTomeL, col. 751. 

Op. cit. 

|Migne, Die. de Bibliog. Cath., Tome I., col. 751. 

Editions and Versions 99 

of Bishop Fisher s works, published by Fleischman at 
Wiirzburg 1697. 

Another edition appeared at Naples 1728, in 12mo. 

Lowndes* speaks of a 16mo edition without place or 
date, and then says there are several other editions. 

In 1850, at Angers, in France, it was published by 
Pettier in both Latin and French, 8vo, with an intro 
duction on the authenticity of the "Assertio" by Clem 
ent Villecourt, the Bishop of La Rochelle. 

The editions of Paris 1562, f Naples 1728, Angers 
1850, and the English editionj to be described later 
have been used in this re-edition. 

The "Assertio" was translated from the Latin into 
several of the modern languages. Luther reproduced it 
freely in German ; Walch gives a translation by Frick, 
in 1522 ; Hergenroether mentions a translation in 
German this same year by H. Emser. Saconay in his 
Preface, p. Ixxii, also speaks of "hoc libro regio, per 
Hieronymum Empserum in linguam Germanicam 

The catalogue of the British Museum, under "Henry 
VIII.," records this: "Schutz und handthabung der 
siben Sacrament. Wider M. Luther, etc. [Translated 
from the Latin by H. Emser.] Erfurt? 1522. 4." 

Audin s mention (Calvin, II. , 425) of a French ver 
sion is questioned, for the first and only French transla 
tion, except that mentioned by Thomson, || that Henry 
himself had it put into French, seems to have been that 
of Pettier, for although, as the Bishop of La Rochellefl 

*Loco citato. 

f Kindly loaned by the Catholic University at Washington. 

{Dr. Healy, of the Catholic University, kindly loaned this, and 
allowed it to be reprinted. 

Hist. del fcglise, V.. p. 247. 

[Court of Henry VIII., Vol. I., p. 381, note. 

IXIX.. 158 seq. 

100 Editions and Versions 

says in his Introduction to it, "vit-on bientot non-seule- 
ment 1 Angleterre, mais 1 Italie, FAllemagne et la 
France reproduire ce chef-d oeuvre," yet he also says: 
"Je ne connais aucune traduction franchise de 
1 ouvrage, qui fut public en 1521, a Londres, sous le 
nom de Henri VIII., roi d Angleterre." 

Gabriel de Saconay had reprinted, but not translated 
the "Assertio" at Lyons. Moreri* in his "Grand 
Dictionnaire Historique" says: "Des 1 an 1561, il 
avoit fait reimprimer 1 ouvrage de Henri VIII. , 
centre Luther, avec une belle et longue preface de sa 

After considerable patience and expense the editor 
has been able to confirm this statement, having at length 
secured a manuscript copy of Saconay s "Introduction" 
to the "Assertio." 

The French version mentioned by Audin,f Main- 
waring Brown, ^ Brunet, and the "Dictionnaire de 
Bibliographic Catholique,"|| is thus entitled on its fly 

"Defense des Sept Sacrements publiee centre Martin 
Luther par Henri VIII., Roi d Angleterre et Seigneur 
d Irland, traduite par R. J. Pettier, Licencie es-lettres. 
Precedee d une preface par L Abbe Maupoint, Vicaire- 
General du diocese de Rennes. D une Introduction sur 
1 Authentieite de ce livre, par Mgr. 1 Eveque de la 
Rochelle. Et suivie de la Constitution de Pie VI., 
Auctorem fidei, traduite par le meme prelat. Angers : 
Imprimerie et Libraire de Laine Freres 1850." 

*Tome IX., Saconay. 
tHenry VIII., p. 92, note b. 

{Henry VIII. s Book, etc., in the Royal Hist. So. s Transactions, 
VIII., p. 242 and fol. 
Op. cit., III., col. 100. 
||Migne, Tome I., col. 507. 

Editions and Versions 101 

And now, last, but not least, the English versions! 
Collier* has this entry: "Henry the Eighth. A copy 
of the letters, wherein the most redouted and mighty 
price, our souerayne lorde, Kyng Henry the eight, 
Kyng of Englande and of France, defesor of the faith, 
and lord of Irlade ; made answere unto a certayne letter 
of Martyn Luther, sent unto hym by the same, and also 
the copy of ye foresayd Luther s letter, in suche order 
as here after foloweth. B. L. 8vo. 49 leaves. 

"The colophon to this volume runs thus: Imprinted 
at London in Fletestrete by Richarde Pynson. . . . 
At the back of the title-page is the list of contents. 

" Fyrst a preface of our souerayne lorde the 
Kynge . . . 

" Copye of the letter, whiche Martin Luther had 

" The copye of the answere of our sayd souerayne 
lorde. . . . The preface fills the first fifteen, and 
Luther s letter the next seven, pages. The answer of 
Henry VIII. occupies the rest of the volume." 

An edition in 1687 in 4to is mentioned by Gasquetf 
and Watts ;:(: and Lowndes in this connection has the 
following entry: "Assertion of the Seven Sacraments 
with his epistle to the Pope, Mr. John Clark s oration, 
the Pope s answer and Bull, etc., translated by T. W. 
Lond. 1687, 4to. Bindley, pt. II., 518, date 1688, 
morocco, 18s. 6d." 

Substantiating the correctness of this is the entry in 
the catalogue of the British Museum, wherein, under 
article "Henry VIII.," one may read : "Assertio Septem 

*A Biographical and Critical Account of the Rarest Books in the 
English Language, J. Payne Collier, F.S.A., Vol. I., p. 368. 
t Eve of Reformation, p. 95, note. 
JUbi supra. 
Bibliog. Man., loco citato. 

102 Editions and Versions 

Sacramentorum : or, an assertion of the seven sacra 
ments, against Martin Luther by Heury the VIII. . . . 
To which is adjoyn d his epistle to the Pope; Mr. J. 
Clark s oration; and the Pope s answer thereunto. As 
also, the Pope s Bull, by which his Holiness was pleased 
to bestow upon K. H. VIII. . . . that most illustrious 
. . . title of Defender of the Faith. Faithfully trans 
lated into English by T[homas] W[ebster]. Gent. 
pp.133. Eug.N. Thompson: London, 1687. 4." And 
also a "Second edition, revised and corrected. London, 
1688. 12." 

As for other English versions, the writer knows of 
none printed in England, for this English version, now 
and here reprinted, was, he believes, done in Ireland; 
and this belief is based on the following reasons: 
1. One might readily suspect that after Henry had 
changed his morals even if not his faith and had not 
only left, but shamefully pillaged and assaulted, the 
Church, naturally he would not allow the "Assertio" to 
be printed.* Neither would any subsequent sover 
eign, save Mary, in her brief and busy reign, and that 
for the same obvious reasons. 2. In the "Advertise 
ment" of the present edition, here reprinted, the writer 
speaks of "The London edition from whence the present 
is taken." Now, that sounds as if this edition were 
not done in London, but somewhere else; and where? 
3. In this same "Advertisement," page 247, note (a), 
the writer refers to the "Historical Account of the 
Eeformation (from Fleury s Ecclesiastical History) 
printed in Corke 1764." Now, at this date in Eng 
land one would hardly expect to see a Catholic so dar 
ing as to break the laws and not only have, but print, a 
book so decidedly pro-Catholic as the "Assertio." And 

*The version just told of, by " T. W.," would seem to be the excep 
tion that proves the rule. It had doubtless been done surreptitiously. 

Editions and Versions 103 

if it were some non-Catholic, he would hardly quote 
Fleury, a Catholic and a Frenchman. Furthermore, 
whether Catholic or not, if an Englishman, he would 
not likely use an edition of Fleury "printed in Corke." 
4. This English edition here reprinted, kindly loaned 
by Dr. Healy, of the Catholic University of America, 
was presented to him by an Irishman in Ireland. 

Now, while this is not an apodictical argument, yet it 
gives a great probability that the edition here reprinted 
was printed not in England, but in Ireland. This edi 
tion seems to be simply a reprint from the first English 
version, for the writer has compared several passages 
quoted by Foxe, in his "Book of Martyrs"* (who, in all 
probability, quoted from the first English version), 
with the corresponding passages in the edition here re 
printed, and the wording agrees perfectly. 

As the first few pages and the last page are missing 
in this copy of Dr. Healy s no further or surer details of 
place or date or printer of the edition here reprinted 
can be given save that it is the second half of a second 
volume in 12mo, with, of course, the spelling "our," 
long s s, a guide-word at the foot of each page, and capi 
tals to nouns within sentences, even though not proper 
names. It is bound in leather, and preceding it in the 
same volume is a "Discourse on the Seven Sacraments," 
but without any clue as to author, place or date. The 
writer knows nothing of the first volume, but this second 
volume is entitled "Sacraments Explained." 

Note. Since the above was written the editor has 
found in the British Museum catalogue, article "Horni- 
hold," the following entry : 

"Hornihold (John), Bishop of Philomel. The Com 
mandments and Sacraments Explained in fifty two 
discourses, to which is added, King Henry the Eighth s 
*Edited by Cummings, Vol. II., p. 79, note. 

104 Editions and Versions 

Defence of the Seven Sacraments, against Martin 
Luther. 2 vols. Dublin, 1821. 12." 

The same catalogue makes entries of "[another edi 
tion] Dublin 1836, 12," and " [another edition] Balti 
more [1858 ?], 8" and "The Decalogue explained, etc., 
1750, 12." From the library of St. Mary s Seminary, 
Baltimore, the editor has secured a copy of the 1821 
edition, entitled "The Commandments and Sacraments 
Explained in Fifty two Discourses by the Rt. Rev. Doc 
tor Hornihold, to which is added, King Henry the 
Eighth s Defence of the Seven Sacraments against Mar 
tin Luther. In two volumes. Dublin : Richard Coyne, 
16 Parliament St., Catholic Bookseller. 1821. Price 
lls. 4%d." The work is in 16mo and bound in calf. On 
page 215 of \ 7 olume II. is the following: "Assertio Sep- 
tem Sacramentorum, or a Defence of the Seven Sacra 
ments against Martin Luther, by Henry the Eighth, 
King of England, France and Ireland, to which are ad 
joined His Epistle to the Pope, The Oration of Mr. 
John Clark, (Orator to His Majesty) on the Delivery of 
this Book to His Holiness, and the Pope s Answer to the 
Oration, as also the Pope s Bull, by which His Holi 
ness was pleased to bestow upon that King (for compos 
ing this book) that most illustrious, splendid, and most 
Christian-like title of Defender of the Faith. Faith 
fully translated into English from the original Latin 
edition. By T. W. Gent." 

This edition of Dr. Hornihold s work is different 
from the one which is here reprinted, though the latter 
is evidently by Dr. Hornihold. 

The catalogue of the British Museum says there was 
"another edition of Hornihold, Dublin, 1836, 12." 
Probably this latter is the edition here reprinted. The 
same catalogue records "another edition, Baltimore, 
1858 (?), 8." 

Editions and Versions 105 

From this narration of the various editions we may 
readily see how widely spread and read the "Assertio" 

"Copies were sent to all the principal courts of Eu 
rope and to the universities. Two copies . . . are still 
in the Vatican Library."* 

This statement must yield to a personal letter from 
Rev. Fr. Ehrle, S.J., from the Vatican Library, where 
in he says there are now in the Vatican four copies of 
the edition of London 1521, all printed on parchment, 
and also the editions of Antwerp 1523, Florence 1543, 
Lyons 1561, and Paris ( ? ) 1562 ( ? ). 

In the British Museum there are sixteen editions and 
ten copies of dates as follows: 1521, two editions and 
two copies; 1522, five editions and three copies; 1543, 
one edition; 1561, one edition and one copy; 1562, 
one edition and two copies; 1687, one edition and two 
copies; and one edition for 1688, 1821, 1836, 1850, 
and 1858. 

Here at the end of the list of the editions of the "As 
sertio," for the sake of clearness and by way of supple 
ment, is inserted a chronological summary taken from 
Walter s "More." 

1521. May, "Assertio" begun. ( ? ) 
October, "Assertio" published. 

1522. July, Luther replied to Henry. 

Henry complained to the Elector, f 
1525. September, at the entreaty of Christian, King of 
Denmark, Luther apologized to Henry. 

*English Catholic Truth So. s publication, "Popery on Every 
Coin of the Realm." 

fAudin, Henry VIII., p. 101, gives the title of the letter of 
Henry to the Princes complaining about Luther, as follows: 
"Contra Lutherum ejusque hseresim epist. scr. regis Ang. ad 
illustrissimas Saxoniae duces pie admonitoria." 

106 Editions and Versions 

1526. More s "Vindicatio Henrici VIII. a oalummis 
Luther!" by "Gulielmus Rosseus." 

So that besides the "Assertio" Henry sent out as his 
other documents, for Henry wrote a reply to Luther.* 
. . . "These letters have been published without note 
of place or date, and are prefixed, in the copy, now be 
fore the writer, of the treatise of Henry on the seven 
sacraments, "f 

As for Luther s writings in reply to the "Assertio," 
Roscoe, in his "Leo X.," says :$ 

"Luther replied to this book in his treatise Contra 
Henricum VIII. Anglise Regem ; which he addressed 
to Seb. Schlick, a Bohemian nobleman, in a dedication 
which bears date 15th July, 1522. In this work he 
treats the King, without any ceremony, as a liar and a 
blasphemer. E"unc quum prudens et sciens mendatia 
componat adversus mei Regis majestatem in ccelis, 
damnabilis Putredo ista et Vermis, jus mihi erit pro 
meo Rege, majestatem Anglicam luto suo et stercore 
conspergere, et coronam istam blasphemam in Christum 
pedibus conculcare. But whilst he stigmatizes the 
book of Hen^y VIII. as stolidissimum and turpissi- 
mum, he acknowledges it to be inter omnes qui contra 
se scripti sunt latinissimum/ He insinuates, however, 
that it was written by some other person in the name 
of the King." 

This criticism is not peculiar to Roscoe: Hutton, in 
his "More," speaks of "an answer from Luther which 
no one denies to be violent and indecent to the last de- 

* "Invictissimi principis Henrici VIII., regis Angliae et Francise, 
ad Martini Lutheri epistolam responsio. " 
fRoseoe, Leo X., Vol. II., note 168. 
{Note 168. 
P. 198. 

Editions and Versions 107 

gree." Stapleton* says of Luther s reply, "spurcissi- 
mum librum spurcus Lutherus evomuerat." 

As to this letter, it is worth while noting that : "His 
[Erasmus 7 ] best friends . . . and some in England, 
suspected that Erasmus 7 hand and spirit were to be de 
tected in the reply that Luther made to King Henry s 
book against him [L.]."f 

As said above, Luther s apology to Henry was sent 
September, 1525 ; it was printed in German and after 
wards also in Latin. Hallam attributes this recantation 
of Luther s to some derangement of the intellectual fac 
ulties.^: Audin assigns some other reason. 

But now turn back from this unhappy German to the 
quiet peaceful Englishman Sir Thomas More. 

Roscoe says that "An answer to the work of Luther 
was published or re-published, London, 1523, under the 
following title : Eruditissimi viri Gulielmi Rossei opus 
elegans, doctum, festivum, pium, quo pulcherrime rele- 
git ac refellit insanas Lutheri calumnias ; quibus invec- 
tissimum Anglia?, Galliseque Regem Henricum ejus 
nominis octavum, Fidei defensorem haud litteris minus 
quam regno clarum scurra turpissirnus insectatur, etc. 
In this work, which is attributed to Sir Thomas More, 
the author has not only endeavoured to refute the argu 
ments, but to equal the abuse of the German reformer. 
... A few years afterwards . . . Luther wrote to him 
to excuse the violence in his book, which he attributed to 
the advice of others. ... To this Henry condescended 
to write a long and argumentative reply, in which he ad 
vises Luther to retract his errors. . . . These letters 
have been published without note of place or date, and 

*Tres Thomae, p. 186. 
f Gasquet, Eve of Reformation, p. 185. 
{Note to Audin s Henry VIII., p. 101. 
Op. citato, note 168. 

108 Editions and Versions 

are prefixed, in the copy now before me, to the treatise 
of Henry on the Seven Sacraments." 

This work of More was in Latin,* and, says Burnet,f 
"He wrote according to the way of the age, with much 
bitterness." However, MaitlandJ may be quoted, who 
says : "I do not want to defend the Romish writers and 
I hope I have no partiality for them, . . . but it really 
appears to me only simple truth to say that, whether 
from good or bad motives, they did in fact abstain from 
that fierce, truculent, and abusive language, and that 
loathsome ribaldry, which characterized the style of too 
many of the Puritan writers. " 

Besides Sir Thomas another wise and holy man de 
fended the King: that was John Fisher, Bishop of 
Rochester, who wrote also in 1523. || Lingardfl says: 
"Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, in a more argumentative 
style, undertook the defence of the King in his work, 
entitled T)efensio Assertionum regis Angliae de fide 
Catholica adversus Lutheri Captivitatem Babylon- 
icam. 7 Audin says of it:** "It is a controversial 
work, where no passionate expression can be perceived, 
and were the bishop alive nowadays, and about to pub 
lish it, he would not require to erase a single word. 
Luther must have suffered most acutely on reading a 
work of such candour and merit." Fisher s argument 
is that "men may err in interpreting Scripture, and 
therefore they must obey the Holy Ghost, Who ex- 

*Eve of Reformation, p. 90. 

fHist. of Reformation, Vol. I., p. 31. 

{The Reformation, p. 48. 

Conf. Lingard, Hist, of Eng., IV., p. 468, note 2. Stewart, 
Life and Letters of Sir Thomas More, p. 119. Henri Bremond, 
Thomas More, Ch. V., note 2. 

|Mason, p. 81, op. cit. in Bibliog. 

fHist. of England, Vol. IV., p. 468. 

**Hemy VIII., pp. 99, 100. 

Editions and Versions 109 

pounds Scripture infallibly in the Church by the mouths 
of the Fathers and Councils and Tradition." 

Besides More and Fisher we are told that in 1523 
"appeared [Wolsey s] elaborate defence of Henry VIII. 
entitled Adsertionis Lutheranse confutatio, and also 
Powell s Tropugnaeulum. "* Of this latter, Collier 
tells us :f 

"One Dr. Powell of Oxford was a second to the King 
in this controversy. . . . The tract was divided into two 
books; the first was entitled T)e summo Pontifice et 
Eucharistise sacramento; the other De Sex Sacra- 
mentis. The King was extremely pleased with 
Powell s management. . . . But he lost the King s 
favour by appearing strongly against the divorce and 
the new supremacy." 

Over the Channel, even in the land of the enemy, 
Henry had apologists. Du Pin, in his "Ecclesiastical 
History," says 4 

"Several divines thought it an honour to defend the 
King of England, by confuting Luther s book, which he 
wrote against him. In Germany, John Eckius an 
swered it in Latin, and Thomas Muncer in High- 

*Hard wick s Christian Church, p. 165, note 1. 
fOp. cit., Pt. II., Bk. I, 17. 
{Sixteenth Century, Bk. II., Ch. XIV. 

presentation to tbe pope 

THOUGH I have found nothing in the records, yet one 
may fancy the feelings of Henry as he waited in Eng 
land for news of how his book had been received at 

Lingard, in his "History of England," tells something 
of the outward presentation and of the inward private 
history, too. He says* that "Clark, dean of Windsor, 
carried the royal production to the pontiff, with an as 
surance, as his master had refuted the errors of Luther 
with his pen, so was he ready to oppose the disciples of 
the heresiarch with his sword, and to array against them 
the whole strength of his kingdom. Leo accepted the 
present, . . . but Henry looked for something more 
pleasing to his vanity than mere acknowledgments. 
The Kings of France had long been distinguished by 
the appellation of Most Christian/ those of Spain by 
Catholic. When Louis XII. set up the schismatical 
synod of Pisa it was contended that he had forfeited his 
right to the former of these titles, and Julius II. trans 
ferred it to Henry, but with the understanding that the 
transfer should be kept secret till the services of the 
King might justify in the eyes of men the partiality of 
the pontiff. After the victory of Guinegate Henry de 
manded the publication of the grant; but Julius was 
dead; Leo declared himself ignorant of the transaction, 
and means were found to pacify the King with the 
promise of some other, but equivalent, distinction. Wol- 
*IV., 446. 

The Presentation to the Pope 111 

sey had lately recalled the subject to the attention of the 
papal court; and Clark, when he presented the King s 
work, demanded for him the title of Defender of the 
Faith. 7 This new denomination experienced some op 
position ; but it could not be refused with decency ; and 
Leo conferred it by a formal bull on Henry, who pro 
cured a confirmation of the grant from the successor of 
Leo, Clement VII." 

Another very interesting and somewhat different ac 
count is that given by Roscoe.* He says : 

"This work Henry dedicated to Leo X., and trans 
mitted a copy to Rome with the following distich : 

Anglorum Rex Henricus, Leo Decime, mittit 
Hoc opus, et fidei testem et amicitiae. 

It was presented to the pontiff in full consistory, by 
the ambassador of the King, who made a long and pom 
pous oration ; to which the Pope replied in a concise and 
suitable manner. The satisfaction which Leo derived 
from this circumstance, at a time when the suprem 
acy of the Holy See was in such imminent danger, may 
be judged of by the desire which he showed to express 
to the King his approbation of the part he had taken. 
After returning him ample thanks, and granting an 
indulgence to every person who should peruse the book, 
he resolved to confer upon him some distinguishing 
mark of the pontifical favour, and accordingly proposed 
in the consistory to honour him with the title of De 
fender of the Faith. This proposition gave rise, how 
ever, to more deliberation, and occasioned greater diffi 
culty in the Sacred College than perhaps the Pope had 
foreseen. Several of the Cardinals suggested other 
titles, and it was for a long time debated whether, in 
stead of the appellation of Defender of the Faith, the 
Leo X., IL, 881. 

112 The Presentation to the Pope 

sovereigns of England should not, in all future times, be 
denominated the Apostolic, the Orthodox, the Faithful, 
or the Angelic.* The proposition of the Pope, who had 
been previously informed of the sentiments of Wolsey on 
this subject, at length, however, prevailed, and a bull 
was accordingly issued, conferring this title on Henry 
and his posterity;! a title retained by his successors to 
the present day, notwithstanding their separation from 
the Roman Church; which has given occasion to some 
orthodox writers to remark that the Kings of this coun 
try should either maintain that course of conduct in re 
ward for which the distinction was conferred, or relin 
quish the title.":]: 

Audin adds that Pace also went with Clark a to the 
Vatican to present the Assertio to His Holiness." 

Pallavicini, in his "History of the Council of Trent,"|| 
says : "II composa done un livre savant contre beaucoup 
des propositions de Martin Luther, le fit presenter au 
pontife en consistoire, le second jour d octobre, par son 
ambassadeur. . . . Ce fut pour Leon le sujet d une 
grande joie." 

He further tells us that among the titles suggested as 
a reward for Henry were "Apostolic/ 7 "Orthodox," 
"Faithful," "Angelic" (Anglican), "Most Faithful," 
"Glorious"; . . . that on the 26th of October, 1521, 
the Consistory agreed on the title "Defender of the 

"Thereupon a bull was drawn up on this subject, and 
a brief which was to be joined to the bull, . . . and these 
two pieces were approved in a consistory 26 Oct. 

*Pallavic., Concil. di Trento, lib. II., cap. 1, Sec. VIII., p. 177. 

fVide App., No. X. 

JSeckend., lib. I., p. 183. (Luther Op.) 

Henry VIII., p. 93. 

|Bk. II., Ch. I., par. 7. 

The Presentation to the Pope 113 

1521."* Pope Clement confirmed the title in a bull of 
March 5, 1523.f 

Humanly speaking, what a boon this book of Henry s, 
and all that it stood for in the eyes of the world, must 
have been to the Pope! Protestantism was about to 
break out in Germany, and this embassy from England 
must have indeed cheered the drooping spirits of the 
Sovereign Pontiff. This is well put by Speed :J "But 
with what acceptance his Holinesse received King 
Henrie s booke, his own oration solemnly made at the 
delivery thereof unto M. John Clarke, the presenter and 
King s ambassador, in his Consistory, and in the pres 
ence of his Cardinals, sufficiently doth show, the trans 
lation whereof we have inserted as we find it in the 
Originall it selfe." [Translation follows.] 

"To manifest which his readinesse, himself among 
his Cardinals decreed an augmentation unto King 
Henries royall style, to bee annexed unto his others ; con 
firming the same by his Bull, which that it perish not by 
the devouring teeth of time wee have here published 
from the originall Parchment, and Leaden Seale it selfe, 
as follows: . . . r 

Last, but not least, is Brewer s edition of the "Letters 
and Papers, Foreign and Domestic,"! concerning Henry 
VIII. s book being presented to the Pope. The account 

"1592. Campeggio to Wolsey: 
"1521 "Is overcome with joy at reading the 

19 Sept. King s aureus libellus. All who have seen 
R. O. it say that, though so many have written 
on the same subject, nothing could be bet 
ter expressed or argued, and he seems to have been in- 
*PartI., Bk. II., Ch. I. 
fSchaff, Christian Church, Ch. VI., 70. 
JHist. of Great Britain, p. 992. 
Vol. Ill, Part II. 

114 The Presentation to the Pope 

spired more by an angelic and celestial than by a human 
spirit. We can hereafter truly call him Lutheromas- 
tica. I send also congratulatory letters to the King. 
You will hear the account of the war in Italy from the 
King s ambassador and the Pope s nuncio with you. 
Kome 19 Sept. 1521. Signed. Lat. p. 1, Add." 

So much for the preliminary presentation. As to the 
presentation in Consistory the records say :* 

"1607. Clerk to Wolsey: 

"The Pope has appointed next week for receiving the 

King s book in open Consistory. Would have sent a 

copy of his proposed oration, but was prevented by the 

hasty departure of the carrier. Rome. 25 Sept. 1521. 

"Hoi. My Lord Cardinal s grace." 

However, we have soon after the omitted speech, at 
least in substance; it runs thus:f 

"1656. JOHN CLABK. 

"His speech in the consistory on presenting the 
King s book. 

"The King has written this book to counteract the 
pernicious and widespread heresies of Martin Luther, 
and commissioned the speaker to offer it to his Holiness. 
Enlarges on the virulence of Luther and his disrespect 
for the Pope, his making himself equal to St. Peter, and 
his contempt for the authority of the Fathers. Luther 
has broken the rule of continence and reduced the sacra 
ments to 3, 2, 1, would probably reduce them to nothing 
some day. Points to the misery of Bohemia caused by 
the Hussite heresy, as a warning. The new enemy 
equals all heresiarchs in learning, exceeds all in wicked 
ness of spirit. 

"The Pope, however, has done his best to stifle the 
flames, aided by learned men in all countries, of which 

*Brewer, State Papers. 

fBrewer, op. cit. 13th Henry VIII. 

The Presentation to the Pope 115 

England, though most remote, is not the least devout. 
There, among other fast friends of the Holy See, the 
most conspicuous is Wolsey, a member of that college, 
who has caused the Pope s rescript against Luther to be 
published everywhere, and Luther s book to be burned, 
called an assembly of learned men to write against him, 
and supported them at his own cost for some months. 
In more simple times error was plucked up by the roots, 
and the quiet of the Church was undisturbed. Many 
wonder how a prince so much occupied was led to at 
tempt a work that demanded all the energies of a veteran 
man of letters ; but having already defended the Church 
with his sword, Henry felt it needful to do so with his 
pen, now that she is in much greater danger. Not that 
he thought it glorious to contend with one so despicable 
as Luther, but he wished to show the world what he 
thought of that horrible portent, and to induce the 
learned to follow his example, by which Luther might 
be compelled himself to retract his heresies. The King, 
however, has no hope of convincing him; he should be 
assailed with those weapons which, if the time per 
mitted, the King would use against the Turks. 

"Finally, the King desires the work not to be pub 
lished otherwise than with the approval of the Pope, 
from whom we ought to receive the sense of the gospel. 

"The Pope s answer, saying that he thanked God 
the Holy See had found such a prince to defend it." 

Further items are also entered : 

"11 Oct. 1659. Fidei Defensor. 

"Bull of Leo X. conferring upon the King, in full 
Consistory, the title of Fidei Defensor/ 

"Kome 5 id Oct. 9 pont 1521. Signed by the Pope 
and Cardinals. Vellum, mutilated. 

"Wolsey s speech on presenting the bull for the title 
of Defender of the Faith. 

116 The Presentation to the Pope 

"When John Cl[erk], the King s ambassador at 
Rome, presented the King s book against Luther to the 
late Pope Leo X., in presence of the College of Cardinals, 
it was beautiful to hear with what exultation the Pope 
and Cardinals broke out into the praises of Henry, de 
claring that no one could have devised a better antidote 
to the poison of heresy, and that Henry had with great 
eloquence completely refuted Luther by reason, Scrip 
ture and the authority of the Fathers. He had thus 
devoted his learning to the support of religion, and 
shown an example to Christian princes. As an imper 
fect acknowledgment of this service, the Pope, with the 
unanimous assent of the Cardinals, a little before his 
death, ordained, by letters under the hands of himself 
and them, that Henry should henceforth be called De 
fender of the Faith/ and ordered a bull to be sent, 
which Wolsey now presents. Congratulates Henry on 
the honour, and himself on having induced him to 
undertake the work. 

"Lat. pp. 2 mutilated." 

It is pertinent to ask about the Bull now, which was 
conveyed to Henry with such "fulsome parade and 
pomp." 3 It "is still in the British Museum, as also an 
autograph letterf from the Pope praising Henry and 
his work in the highest terms.":): 

Fuller, in his "Church History of Britain," Vol. II., 
p. 13, says: 

"There is a tradition that King Henry s fool, . . . 
coming into the court, and finding the King trans 
ported with an unusual joy, boldly asked him the cause 
thereof ; to whom the King answered it was because that 

*Worsley, Dawn of the Reformation, p. 160. 
fSee Pope s Letter to Henry, p. 175. 

^English Catholic Truth Society, pamphlet "Popery on Every 
Coin of the Realm." 

The Presentation to the Pope 117 

the Pope had honoured him with a style more eminent 
than any of his ancestors. O good Harry/ quoth the 
fool, let thou and I defend one another, and let the faith 
alone to defend itself. 7 " 

Finally, there is an amusing as well as interesting 
statement made by Lowndes,* who says that the Roman 
edition of 1521 had four leaves prefixed, declaring: 
"Librum hunc Invictiss Anglise Regis, Fidei Defensoris 
contra Mart. Lutherum Legentibus, decem annorum et 
totidem XL Indulgentia apostolica Auctoritate concessa 

*Biograph. Manual, Part IV., p. 1039. 

Eitle "SJefen&er of tbe faitb 
flt to be Iberebitars ? 

EDWABD VII. is the seventeenth "English sovereign 
who has borne that title. . . . It is the only title be 
sides that of King* of England he thinks it worth while 
to put on his coinage. In other words, his proudest 
title, after King of England/ is that given by the 
Pope Defender of the Faith. "* 

Now, the question is, has the present King, had any 
king or queen other than Henry VIII., the right to the 
title "Defender of the Faith" which the Pope gave 
Henry ? 

The question must be divided in two, thus : 

1. Did the King of England ever have this title be 
fore Henry VIII. ? 

2. Was Henry VIII/s title given to him by the Pope 
to be hereditary ? 

1. As to the first, there are several reliable witnesses 
for the affirmative. 

In the "Archseologia," published in London, Vol. 
XIX., p. 1, Luders presents very interesting testimony. 
He says: "According to Henault, Pepin had received 
the title of Most Christian 7 in A.D. 755 from the Pope, 
and Charles the Bald in 859 from a Council. Charles 
the Sixth, in a charter of 1413, refers to ancient usage 
for the same." Continuing, he says that Richard II. 
and Henry IV. both speak of themselves as "Defenders 
of the Faith." 

*English Catholic Truth Society, pamphlet "Popery on Every 
Coin of the Realm." 

The Title "Defender of the Faith" 119 

Further proof of this assertion is found in the work 
"A History of the Christian Church during the Ref 
ormation, by Charles Hardwick, M.A., [edited] by 
W. Stubbs, M.A."* Apropos of Henry s title, it is 
said that "the title itself, however, was not new, hav 
ing been applied to previous kings, e. g., to Henry IV. 

Confirming this statement, that Henry IV. used the 
title, is the following extract from Wilkins "Concilia," 
Vol. III., p. 334, wherein under the title "Convocatio 
Prselectorum et Cleri Prov. Cant. Anno Christi 1411. 
Reg. Anglioe Henric. IV. 13. Primo die Decembris in 
ecclesia S. Pauli, London. Ex reg. Arundel II., fol. 
22," we read that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas 
Arundel, says: "Quod ipse [Thomas Arundel] pro parte 
sua, singulique confratres sui, et tota ecclesia Anglicana 
tenebantur, et semper tenerentur cum omni devotione 
specialius et devotissime habere recommissum pros- 
perum statum domini regis, tamquam pugilis, athletse, 
et prsecipui defensoris fidei orthodoxse; qui maxime ad 
extirpandum errores et hsereses, ac herbas venenosas, et 
plantulas infectivas, jam nimis diu per regni latitudi- 
nem seccrescentes, novitatis Lollardicae pravitatis ani- 
madversionem suse regise majestatis, tamquam rex 
catholicus, cum omni assistentia prebuit gratiosam." 

Again, in Lewis "Fisher" ) it is said : "And yet it s 
certain this was no new title, but had been claimed and 
used long before by King Richard II. in the commis 
sions granted by him for the apprehending and im 
prisoning those who taught or maintained the conclu 
sions of Dr. Wiclif. Nos zelo fidei Catholicse cujus 
sumus et esse volumus Defensores in omnibus commoti." 

Further, Croly, in his "Luther and the Reforma 
tion,"^: speaks of "The title of Defender of the Seven 
*P. 165, note 3. fVol. I., p. 108. JP. 222. 

120 The Title "Defender of the Faith" 

Sacraments/ a title which had been borne by former 
kings, but which he [Henry VIII. ] exulted in as a per 
sonal distinction." 

So that one may reasonably conclude that the title 
"Defender of the Faith," or at least a title similar in 
wording, if not in idea, was used before Henry VIII. 
received it from Leo. And, moreover, while it is not 
so stated in the authorities consulted, yet this title, used 
before the time of Henry, would seem to have been 

2. And now as to the second part of the question: 
Was the title given by the Pope to Henry VIII. in 
tended by the Pope to be perpetual and hereditary ? 

The evidence is not all on one side, and hence the 
testimonies declaring the title hereditary are here given 

Butler, in his "Church History of Britain,"* says of 
Henry VIII. : "To requite his pains the Pope honoured 
him and his successors with a specious title, A Defender 
of the Faith/ " 

Thomson agrees with this in his "Court of Henry 
VIII.," f and says : "His theological attainments enabled 
him in after times to procure for himself and his suc 
cessors the title of Defender of the Faith. 

So, too, Lewis, in his "Life of Dr. John Fisher,":): 
speaks of "An Acte in bull under lead declaring His 
Grace to be the Defender of the Christian Faith and 
his successors forever" 

The "Annals of England," page 47, says of Leo: "He 
decreed to grace King Henry and his successors with 
that honourable one of Defender of the Faith." 

Concurring with this is Cobbett in his "History of 
the Protestant Eeformation in England and Ireland," 

Vol. II., p. 13. jVol. I., p. 108. 

fVol. I., p. 8. Phila., 1825, p. 69. 

The Title "Defender of the Faith" 121 

who makes the translation of the Pope s Bull declare 
that he, the Pope, does "grant unto Your Majesty, your 
heirs and successors/ the title. 

In Edward Hall s "Lives of the Kings"* is the fol 
lowing very interesting and detailed entry : "The second 
day of February, the Kynge beyng at Grenewiche, came 
thether the Cardinall with a legacion from Leo, bishop 
of Rome. . . . And finally the Cardinall declared how 
the sayd bishop of Rome had sent his highnes an Acte 
in Bull under leade, declaryng therein his grace to be 
defender of the Christian fayth, and his successors for 
evermore. And when his grace had received the sayd 
Bull and caused it to be redde and published, he went 
to his chapell to heare Masse." 

"Holinshed s Chronicle of England, Scotland, and 
Ireland" f has the following to say on the title being 
hereditary : "On the second daie of Februarie, the King, 
as then being at Greenewich, received a bull from the 
Pope, whereby he was declared Defender of the Chris 
tian faith, and likewise his successors forever. . . . 

"The title was ascribed unto the King because he had 
written a booke against Luther in Germanie ; whereunto 
the said Luther answered verie sharpelie, nothing spar 
ing his authoritie nor majestie. Of which booke pub 
lished by the King, I will not (for reverence of his 
roialtie), though I durst, report what I have read: 
bicause we are to judge honourablie of our rulers, and 
to speake nothing but good of the princes of the people. 
Onelie this brief e clause or fragment I will adde (least 
I might seeme to tell a tale of the man in the moone) 
that King Henrie in his said booke is reported to rage 
against the divell and antichrist to cast out his some 
against Luther, to raise out the name of the Pope, and 

*Henry VIII., Vol. I., p. 235. 
t Vol. III., England, p. 675. 

122 The Title "Defender of the Faith" 

yet to allow his law, etc. I suppresse the rest for shame, 
and returne to our historic." 

John Foxe, in his "Acts and Monuments,"* says the 
same: "But whosoever had the labour of this hook, the 
King had the thanks and also the reward; for conse 
quently upon the same the bishop of Rome gave to the 
said King Henry, for the style against Luther, the style 
and title of Defender of the Christian Faith/ and to 
his successors forever" 

Baronius, in his "Annales Ecclesiasticse,"f sides 
with the foregoing: "Tarn gratum accidit Leoni id 
munus Henrici Regis, ut non modum ilium laudibus 
celebrarit, verum etiam defensoris Ecclesia? titulo deco- 
raverit, quern veluti perpetuum et immortale regise 
glorias monumentum in ejus posteras transfundendum 
const ituit."$ 

This is certainly a rather formidable array of his 
torians in favour of the title being hereditary, and yet 
there are others, best of all the Bull itself, in comparison 
with which all other witnesses are of little weight, which 
seem to disprove the hereditary character of the 
title, at least in the Pope s intention as implied in the 

Mainwaring Brown, in the Royal Historical Society s 
Publications, Vol. VIII. , has an article on "Henry 
VIII. s Book, Assertio Septem Sacramentorum/ and 
the Royal Title of Defender of the Faith. " He says: 
"Old writers, such as Holinshed, Lever, etc., say that it 
[the title] was granted to the King and his successors, 
but the words of the bull" are [see elsewhere in this 
volume]. "This bull, then, so far from making the title 
hereditary, especially set forth that it was not so, and 

Vol. IV., pp. 293, 294. 

fCum Pagi, Tom. XXXI., p. 843, ad an. 1521, parag. LXXIV. 

JIV., 468, note 1. 

The Title "Defender of the Faith" 123 

that if Henry s successors desired to bear it they must 
earn it as he had done. . . . 

"Henry did not at first see that the personal title 
which he held from Rome was inferior in dignity to 
the hereditary titles which they [Kings of France and 
Spain] held." 

And he furthermore says: "In 1523 the King ob 
tained a confirmation of [the title] from Clement VII. 
The original grantor, Leo X., had died before the bull 
containing the title reached England. ... It is likely 
that Henry desired to have the title made hereditary. 
. . . Several old writers (e. g., Burnet) speak of the 
second bull actually making it so. ... 

"The Pope so ambiguously worded [the bull] that 
Henry might be privately told that he could make the 
title hereditary on its authority. 

"It must not, however, be forgotten that there is no 
evidence more than presumptive in favour of this 
view. . . . 

" . . . Henry will keep a title which he ought to have 
dropped, and will grant to his descendants a distinction 
which neither he nor his Parliament had any right to 
bestow. . . . 

"There is a vast difference between the authority 
which granted the title and that which made it heredi 
tary. The Pope commanded all Christian people to call 
Henry Defender of the Faith ; the English Parliament 
could only require his own subjects to address him by 
that title." 

Lastly, from this same author we read the following : 
"Titulum ilium et cognomen Fidei Defensoris . . . 
approbamus confirmanius tibique perpetuum et pro- 
prium deputamus." 

Circumstances confirm this interpretation, for the 
Pope would hereby please Henry by his title, yet not 

124 The Title "Defender of the Faith" 

arouse the jealousy of the others by a hereditary one. 
Strangely enough, Parliament declared the title heredi 
tary (see State Papers, 35 Hen. VIII., c. 3). It was 
repealed by Parliament in 1554, yet the crown still used 
it. Elizabeth revived it by act of Parliament. 

But the weightiest witness in this question is surely 
the Pope s Bull itself ; so that we should carefully read 
the following passage of it, which decides that the title 
is not hereditary : 

"As we have by this title honoured you, we likewise 
command all Christians that they name your Majesty 
by this title, and that in their writings to your Majesty, 
immediately after the word King they add Defender of 
the Faith. Having thus weighed and diligently con 
sidered your singular merits, . . . which [title] as 
often as you hear, or read, you shall remember your 
own merits and virtues ; nor will you, by this title, exalt 
yourself, . . . but become more strong and constant in 
your devotion to this Holy See, by which you were 
exalted. And you shall rejoice in our Lord, who is the 
Giver of all good things, for leaving such a perpetual 
and everlasting monument of your glory to posterity, 
and showing the way to others that if they also covet to 
be invested with such a title, they may study to do such 
actions, and to follow the steps of your most excellent 
Majesty; whom, with your wife, children, and all who 
shall spring from you, we bless with a bounteful and 
liberal hand." 

Leo s other communication to Henry, dated Rome, 
Nov. 4, 1521, and found elsewhere in this volume in 
both Latin and English, does not say that the title was 
to be hereditary. Certainly, if the Pope had meant it 
to be hereditary, one cannot but think that he would 
have said so, as he seems overflowing with .kindness and 
marks of affection for Henry. Besides, the Bull alludes 

The Title "Defender of the Faith" 125 

to the title and hopes "that you may be able to sustain 
that singular and indescribable glory, which your 
Majesty has quite justly merited by your very great 
deeds, even to the very last day of this life, and leave it 
to be told of to all your posterity [et earn in omni pos- 
teritate prsedicandam relinquere]." 

Peter Heylin, in his "Ecclesia Restaurata" (2 vols., 
Cambridge, 1849), Vol. I., p. 44, says of the heredi- 
tariness of the title: "But then, considering with him 
self that it was first granted by that Pope as a personal 
favour, and not intended to descend upon his posterity" 

In the "Archreologia," Vol. XIX., p. 1 and fol., pub 
lished in London 1819, Luders writes: "Our Kings do 
not bear this title under the authority of Leo X. s bull 
to Henry VIII., or that of Clement VII., his successor, 
who confirmed it. ... This grant, we should say, ac 
cording to our law, has no proper words of limitation 
and inheritance, for the blessing alone is conferred upon 
the wife and children, and not the title. The inheritance 
seems not to be conveyed. So that none but the King 
himself could claim the honour, as peculiar to his per 
son, unless in the opinion of His Holiness the descend 
ant should be thought to inherit the virtues of his 

"The Bull of confirmation, granted two years after 
wards by Clement VII., ... in respect of the title 
earned by his extraordinary merits, simply confirms 
the grant of Leo to the King himself: Approbamus, 
confirmamus, Tibique perpetuum et proprium depu- 
tamus. " 

How, then, can the statements of so many historians 
who declare the title hereditary be explained ? Possibly 
flattery was their motive; very probably assumption, 
not having carefully read the Bull ; or perhaps the wish 

126 The Title "Defender of the Faith" 

was father to the thought. So for the older historians. 
For the later ones, the continued use of the error would 
lead these to fancy that their monarch had a perfect 
right not only "de facto" but "de jure," and con 
sequently they would infer that the Pope had made it 

At any rate, there is one very reliable historian who 
stands against the title s being hereditary "de jure" ; it 
is Lingard, who, in his "History of England," says most 
plainly and decidedly: "It should be observed that in 
neither of the bulls is there any grant of inheritance. 
The title belonged to the King personally, and not to 
his successors Tibi perpetuum et proprium . . . Ibid. 
But Henry retained it after his separation from the 
comimmion of Rome, and in 1543 it was annexed to the 
crown by act of Parliament, 35 Henry VIII., 3." 

It might be added by way of negative argument, that 
as Polydore Vergil says nothing of the hereditary char 
acter of the title, we might also conclude that it was 
for Henry alone and personally. 

So that, though a the King s grace would not lose that 
stile (defender of the faith) for all London and twenty 
miles round about,"* yet even this he had no right to 
hand down to posterity ; the assumption of the title by 
the subsequent sovereigns of England was without right 
and without good taste. 

^Christopher Wordsworth, Ecclesiastical Biography, Vol. II., 
p. 476, note 2, of London edition, 1837. 

Criticism ant> Effects of tbe "Hssertio" 

As to the merits of the "Assertio," critics differ 
widely, apparently somewhat influenced by religious 
bias. "Henry VIII. s treatise Assertio Septem Sacra- 
mentorum is an example of exactly the opposite dis 
position [to Dean Colet s treatise on the seven sacra 
ments], that of adhering exactly to received tradition. 
It has no particular merit, literary or theological."* 
So wrote Blunt. 

Collier f is a little more favourable : "As to perform 
ance, the King seems to have the better of the contro 
versy ; and, generally speaking, to be much the sounder 
divine. Generally speaking, I say, his principles are 
more catholic, and his proofs more cogent. He seems 
superior to his adversary in the vigour and propriety of 
his style, in the force of his reasoning, and the learning 
of his citations. But then, with due regard to his 
memory, it must be said that his manner is not alto 
gether unexceptionable. He leans too much upon his 
character, argues in his garter robes, and writes as 
twere with his sceptre. He gives rough language some 
times, treats Luther with contempt, and drives his in 
vective pretty strong upon him. ..." 

The greater part of the criticism is favourable : 

Butler J says : "It is written with order and perspicu 

*The Reformation of the Church of England, by J. H. Blunt, 
M.A.,F.S.A., Vol. I., p. 429. 

fEccles. Hist, of Great Britain, Part II., Book I. 
{Historical Memoirs, Vol. I., p. 24. 

128 Criticism and Effects of the fe Assertio" 

Leo calls the doctrine set forth in the "Assertio" 
"remarkable/ and "permeated with the dew of heavenly 
grace," and he "thanked Almighty God most deeply, 
Who moved your mind, so able and prone to every good 
work, and, as it were, designed to pour grace from 
above into your mind, that you should write these 

"It was throughout an appeal to authority,"-)- is the 
criticism of a professor in a great American university, 
which he intended to be unfavourable, but which appears 
quite the contrary to one who believes that every good 
comes down from the Father of light and the Giver of 
all good gifts, and knows that every one should be sub 
ject to authority. 

Hergenroether s estimate is calm and just: "Get 
ouvrage, qu on a beaucoup surfait de son temps, etait 
conu dans une forme populaire, et faisait habilement 
ressortir les contradictions de Luther sur la confession, 
les indulgences et la primaute."^: 

Saconay, on p. Ixxii of his Preface to the "Assertio," 
says: "Postea quam autem sensit Lutherus hoc libro 
regio, per Hieronymum Empserum in linguam Ger- 
manicam translate, multum existimationis apud Ger- 
manos detrahi evangelio suo." 

One who reads the "Assertio" cannot fail to be im 
pressed with the common sense and cool reason dis 
played, and will not unlikely be won over to Henry and 
the faith he defends. He quotes the Scriptures very 
frequently, and several of the Fathers and theologians 
aptly and tellingly. To be more accurate, he quotes 
the Old Testament forty-two times: Genesis 5, Exodus 

*Bull of Leo, printed In this volume. 

fQeorge Fisher, Prof. Eccles. Hist, in Yale, in his " The Refor 
mation," p. 126. 

JHist. de 1 fcglise, V.. 247. 

Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio" 129 

3, Leviticus 1, Numbers 1, Deuteronomy 3, I. Kings 2, 
Psalms 9, Proverbs 3, Wisdom 1, Ecclesiasticus 2, Ec- 
clesiastes 1, Ezechiel 4, Isaias 3, and Zachary 1. The 
New Testament is quoted one hundred and one times: 
Matthew 11, Mark 3, Luke 10, John 18, Acts 4, Komans 
7, I. Corinthians 12, Galatians 1, I. Thessalonians 1, 
Colossians 1, Ephesians 3, I. Timothy 10, II. Timothy 
2, Titus 2, Hebrews 4, James 8, I. Peter 2, I. John 1, 
Apocalypse 1. 

The style is simple and direct, and appropriate to 
the subject. 

Disparaging criticism can easily come from the 
biassed prejudice and a priori decision of one who has 
not read it, or who hates the faith Henry so well de 
fends, or who would expect too much of an amateur. 

No wonder, then, that so able and practical and 
timely a work should have had the effect that it did. 
Audin* says : "Never did a controversialist, even to this 
hour, win such laurels of glory as Henry ; . . . praise 
daily laid at his feet from Germany, Italy, France, the 
Netherlands, and Spain." And in his "Calvin" (II., 
424) the same author asserted: "Or, TAssertio septem 
sacramentorum du monarque anglais, accueillie a Rome 
avec enthousiasme, avait emu le monde theologique." 

The Bishop of La Rochelle, in his Introduction to 
the "Assertio," says as much and even more : "Un livre 
qui fit tant de bruit dans FlSurope entiere, qui excita 
tant de joie dans 1 Eglise, qui produisit, parmi les 
savants, une admiration si general, et qui jet a la terreur 
dans le camp de I heresie." 

As to the reception it received at the Court of Rome, 
Pallavicinif says: "Ce fut pour Leon le sujet d une 
grande joie." 

* Henry VIII, p. 92. 

fTrente, Bk. I., Ch. I., sec. 8, par. 177. 

130 Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio" 

Better still, we have a really beautiful, fatherly criti 
cism of the worth of the "Assertio" in the Pope s Bull 
of November 4, 1521, wherein he says so many kind 
things in such a beautiful way. The Bull is printed 
elsewhere in this volume in both Latin and English, 
so I quote from it only a few lines : "What seriousness 
in the theme itself ! What order ! How great force of 
eloquence, so that the Holy Spirit seems to be in it! 
Everything is full of judgment, of wisdom, of piety; 
there is kindness in teaching, meekness in admonishing, 
truth in arguing," etc. 

As to the effects it had at Rome, Sample* says : "He 
accomplished his main purpose, for he received from 
the Pope the title of T)ef ender of the Faith. : However, 
this was not done hurriedly and without forethought, 
for Brewerf says that only "after months spent in de 
liberation, Henry, the new candidate for spiritual 
honours, was admitted into the narrow and exclusive 
orbit of the Church s patrons : Def ender of the Faith/ 

A less selfish, more generous, and far wider purpose 
is attributed to Henry by Worsley in his "Dawn of the 
Reformation.":): He says: "As a theological work, 
although not destitute of polemical ingenuity in argu 
ment, it missed the main point [stopping Luther and 
the Reformation]. It was hailed as a prodigy. To 
the Germans especially it appeared marvellous that a 
crowned head should contain so much learning." 

Still, Henry is declared to have deeply influenced a 
great and very great man, his own Prime Minister, 
for "There is no reason to doubt the statement that at 
least one illustrious convert [More] was brought over 
to a belief in the Pope s supremacy by the very con- 

*Beacon Lights of the Reformation, p. 199. 
f Reign of Henry VIII., Vol. I., p. 302. 
JP. 160. 

Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio" 131 

troversialist who was afterwards to behead him for re 
taining it. 7 * And this despite the statement that "Sir 
Thomas [had] spent seven years considering the claims 
of the Papacy to be a divine institution/ as says Mary 
Allies, f 

As to Henry s faith, Gairdner, in the "Dictionary of 
National Biography," article "Henry VIII.," says: 
"Henry showed himself every day more zealous for 
ancient doctrine. In November, 1537, he issued a 
proclamation for Anabaptists to quit the kingdom. In 
the same month he signally illustrated his position as 
head of the Church by hearing personally an appeal from 
the Archbishop of Canterbury by a heretic named John 
Lambert, otherwise called Nicholson, who denied the 
corporeal presence in the sacrament. From the ac 
count of an eye-witness, preserved, and certainly not 
weakened in effect, by Foxe (Acts and Monuments, ed. 
Townsend, 1838, V., 230-6), he seems to have shame 
fully browbeat the accused. Cromwell, on the other 
hand, in a contemporary despatch, reports with admira 
tion how benignly His Grace essayed to convert the 
miserable man. Collier s Ecclesiastical History/ ed. 
1852, IV., 428." 

But Henry did not live up to his ideals, and this 
failing to practise what he preached has been assigned 
as the reason of his inability to check the cataclysm of 
the Reformation, for Henry "answered Luther by his 
pen, not by his life, and this is the whole secret of his 
failure." J He still had faith; indeed, it seems to be 
admitted that to his death Henry was a Catholic in 
belief, for "To his doctrine on the sacraments Henry 
consistently held fast for the rest of his life." 

*Epochs of Mod. History, Moberly, p. 152. 
fThe Church in England, A.D. 1509-1603, p. 10. 
JM. Allies, Ch. in Eng., p. 13. 
Worsley s Dawn of the Reformation, p. 159. 

132 Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio" 

As to Henry s faith outwardly manifested even at the 
end of his life, Luders, in the "Archseologia," XIX., 
p. 1 and fol., says: "Our Henry indeed proved an un 
grateful child of the Holy See, but his character had 
nothing to disgrace the donor at the time of the gift; 
and though he renounced the Pope, he may be said to 
have defended the Catholick faith to the last." 

And Sander* has the following interesting notice: 
"In the year of our Lord 1541 the imperial Diet was 
held in Ratisbon, and thereto the King [Henry VIII.], 
weary, after the manner of the world, not only of the 
wickedness of others, but also of his own, sent Sir 
Henry Knyvett, and Stephen Gardiner, bishop of Win 
chester, a man of great learning and marvellous 
sagacity. One of his reasons for sending them was his 
desire to justify his caution in matters of religion before 
certain princes of Germany, who were charging him 
with being lukewarm in his prosecution of the new 
gospel. But his chief reason was this : He knew that if 
neither Catholics nor Protestants were satisfied with 
him, seeing that he fully agreed with neither, he there 
fore determined that his ambassadors should, in concert 
with the emperor, devise some means by which he might 
be reconciled to the Roman Pontiff, and openly observe 
the perfect rule of the Catholic faith, which he knew 
to be more true and more certain than any other. He 
was driven to this by the pressure of his conscience, 

*Rise and Growth of the Anglican Schism. Notes by David 
Lewis, pp. 152, 153. As to Sander s trustworthiness, Nicholas 
Pocock, in his Preface to "The Pretended Divorce between Henry 
VIII. and Catharine of Aragon," in the Camden Society s Transac 
tions, 1878, has the following tribute to Sander: "Whom it has 
been the fashion ever since the days of Burnet to disparage as 
eminently untrustworthy. At one time I was of the same opinion, 
but the more intimately I became acquainted with Sander s work 
the more reason I found to change my judgment about him." 

Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio" 133 

which, as the ancients have justly observed, is equal to 
a thousand witnesses."* 

But these pretty speculations are well-nigh vain now. 
Poor Henry! What a change from the "Defender of 
the Faith" to him who drew England the land of 
Augustine, Bede, Lanfranc, Anselm and Thomas 
away from the pulsing heart of unity and the sacra 
mental system, of grace ! 

In "A Treatise on the Pretended Divorce between 
Henry VIII. and Catharine of Aragon, by Nicholas 
Harpsfield, LL.D., by Nicholas Pocock, M.A.," the 
Camden Society s publication for 1878, is an interest 
ing domestic scene and a prophecy said to have been 
made by Henry VII. respecting the gigantic mischief 
his son was to consummate. It says : "I credibly under 
stand himself [Henry VIII. ] was beaten of his father, 
saying to Alcock, Bishop of Ely, then present and en 
treating for him : Never entreat for him, for this child 
shall be the undoing of England. 

And yet, despite his bad life, Green says of him in 
his "History of the English People" :f ". . . To the 
end his convictions remained firmly on the side of the 
doctrines which Luther denied." 

In the "Chronicle of King Henry VIII. of England, 
written in Spanish by an unknown hand, translated with 
notes and instructions by Martin A. Sharp Hume, 

*"Burnet (Hist. Reform., IV., 578, ed. Pocock) says that this 
is another ornament of the fable, to show the poet s wit; but it 
is as devoid of truth as any passage in Plautus or Terence is. 
. . . Sander had better opportunities of learning the truth on 
this point, both in Rome and in Spain, and Gardiner confesses it 
(Foxe, VI., 578) : Master Knevett and I were sent ambassadors 
unto the emperor to desire him that he would be a mean between 
the Pope s Holiness and the King, to bring the King to the obedi 
ence of the See of Rome. " 

fVol. II., p. 124. 

134 Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio" 

Knight of the Koyal Spanish Order of Isabel the 
Catholic, London, 1889," p. 152, it is said of Henry on 
his death-bed : "The next day he confessed and took the 
Holy Sacrament, and commended his soul to God." A 
foot-note amplifies and confirms this statement. And 
this firm faith was probably, in part at least, the effect of 
the "Assertio," the studying out and composing of which 
so clearly and deeply convinced Henry of the truth of 
the faith he then defended that even after his morals had 
changed yet his faith was in much still staunch and 
true. The English Catholic Truth Society s tract, 
"Popery on Every Coin of the Kealm," says : "Protest 
antism can claim the last and worst part of his [Henry 
VIII. s] life; but in his earlier and better years, both 
as prince and king, he was a staunch Catholic." 

Those earlier, better, Catholic days were looked back 
to with pleasure by the people who later saw and suf 
fered by his unhappy change. To quote the great Cath 
olic historian of Henry VIII. and the Keformation, 
Dom Gasquet, in his "Henry VIII. and the English 
Monasteries":* "They remembered Henry in his 
earlier days, when he was never so immersed in business 

*Vol. II., pp. 331, 332. 

By way of parenthesis it may be interesting to recall the various 
wives of Henry and their respective children, who later succeeded to 
the throne. 

Henry s six wives (?) and children : Catharine of Aragon, re 
pudiated 1533 Mary ; Anne Boleyn, beheaded 1536 Elizabeth ; 
Jane Seymour, died 1537 Edward VI. ; Anne of Cleves, repudiated 
1540 ; Catharine Howard, beheaded 1541 ; Catharine Parr, died 1548. 

Apropos of Catharine s "divorcement" by Henry, Mr. John Strype, 
in his "Memorials of Thomas Cranmer," Vol. I., p. 4 and fol., has 
the following interesting details : " Not long after this, King Henry 
being persuaded that the marriage between him and Queen Cath 
arine, daughter to King Ferdinand of Spain, was unlawful and 
naught, by Dr. Langland, Bishop of Lincoln, his confessor, and 
other of his Clergy ; he sent to six of the best learned men of 

Criticism and Effects of the "Assertio" 135 

or pleasure that he did not hear three or five Masses a 
day. ... He had at bottom a zeal for the faith." So 
that the "Assertio" affected Henry himself. But, more 
over, it doubtless had an influence on thousands, millions 
of others who, during those days that tried men s 
souls, were defended and strengthened and calmed in 
their old, Catholic faith by the "Assertio Septem Sacra- 

May it not be hoped that his work, now reprinted, 
may perhaps be in some way helpful in leading back 
again some of those whose forefathers Henry led or 
drove from the Church ? 

Cambridge, and as many of Oxford, to debate this question, 
Whether it were lawful for one brother to marry his brother s wife, 
being known of his brother ? . . . These learned men agreed fully, 
with one consent, that it was lawful, with the Pope s dispensation, 
so to do." And page 6 : " This was about August, 1529. Henry 
learning of Cranmer s opinion, that the devines should leave it to 
the King, sent for him and lodged him with the Earl of Wiltshire 
and Ormond, named Sir Thomas Bolen, . . . esteeming him a fit 
person for Cranmer to reside with, who had himself been employed 
in embassies to Rome and Germany about the same matter. " 

As to Cranmer s opinion, it was as follows : " There is but one 
truth in it ; which no men ought, or better can discuss than the 
devines ; whose sentence may be soon known, and brought so to pass 
with little industry and charges, that the King s conscience may 
thereby be quieted and pacified. Which we all ought to consider, 
and regard in this question of doubt; and then his highness, in 
conscience quieted, may determine himself that which shall seem 
good before God. And let these tumultuary processes give place 
unto a certain truth." Id., p. 5. 

/. Sources 

Assertio VII. Sacramentorum adversus Mart. Lu- 
therum. HenricoVIII. Anglise RegeAuctore. [Here 
in reprinted.] 

Assertionum Kegis Anglise de Fide Catholica adversus 
Lutheri Babylonicam Captivitatem defensio. Au- 
thore R. D. Johanne Roffensi Episcopo. [To be 
found in Fisher s Works, and also bound up with 
many editions of the Assertio, e. g., that of Paris 
Brewer. Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic. 

Henry VIII. Longmans, 1867. 
Bullarium Magnum Romanum. Tom. I., col. 620. 

Luxemburgi 1727. 

Clark, John. Oration to Leo X. [Herein reprinted.] 

Erasmiana Bibliotheca, 3 e Serie. Erasmus, Desiderius. 

Roterodami: Opera Omnia. Lugduni Batavorum. 

Cura et impensis Petri Van der Aa. MDCCIII. 

Fischerii, Joannis Roffensis, in Anglia Episcopi. 

Opera. Wirceburgi 1597. 

Giustinian. Court of Henry VIII. London 1854. 
Henry s Letter to Leo X. [Herein reprinted.] 
Henry s Letter to Luther. [Herein reprinted.] 
Leo X. s Reply to Clark s Oration. [Herein reprinted.] 
Leo X. s Letter to Henry. [Herein reprinted.] 
Leo X. s Bull to Henry. [Herein reprinted.] 
Polydori Vergilii Urbinatis. Anglise Historise Libri 
Vigintiseptem. Basilise, apud Mich. Isingrinium: 
Anno MDLV. 

Bibliography 137 

Roper, William. Life of Sir Thomas More, by his son- 
in-law, by Singer. Chiswick 1822. 

Rymer, Thomas. Feeder a. Churchill, London 

State Papers between England and Spain, Calendar of. 
Vol. II., Henry VIII. Edited by Bergenroth. 
Longmans, London 1866. 

Wilkins. Concilia Magnae Britannise et Hibernise. 
Londini 1737. 

II. Secondary Literature 

Allies, Mary A. The Church in England, 1509-1603. 
London 1895. 

Alzog, John. Manual of Universal Church History. 
3 vols. Clarke, Cincinnati 1874. 

Annals of England. 3 vols. Oxford 1856. 

Annals of England. Henry VIII., Edward VI., Queen 
Mary. In Latin, by Francis, Lord Bishop of Here 
ford. Englyshed by Morgan Godwyn. Islyp Stansby, 
London 1630. 

Annals or General Chronicle of England; begun by 
John Stow; by Edmund Howes, Gent. Impenses 
Ricardi Meighen, Londini 1631. 

Archseologia. Society of Antiquaries of London. 

Audin. Henry VIII. Dolman, London 1852. 
Life of Luther. London 1854. 
Calvin. 2 vols. Paris 1843. 

Baronii. Annales Ecclesias. Cum Pagii. Tom. 
XXXL, pag. 343. Lucse 1755. 

Beard, Charles. Martin Luther and the Reformation 
in Germany. London 1889. 

Beckett. English Reformation. London 1890. 

Blunt, J. H. The Reformation of the Church of Eng 
land. Rivington, London 1882. 

138 Bibliography 

Bossuet. History of the Variations of the Protestant 
Church. 2 vols. Kenedy, New York 1896. 

Bremond, Henri. Thomas More. Licoffre, Paris 1904. 

Brewer. Reign of Henry VIII. 2 vols. Murray , 
London 1884. 

Bridgett. Sir Thomas More. Burns & Gates, London 

Brown, J. Mainwaring. "Henry VIII. s Book Assertio 
Septem Sacramentorum/ " in the Royal Historical 
Society s Transactions, Vol. VIII., p. 242 and fol. 

Brunet, Jacques Charles. Manuel du Libraire. Tomes 
V. Didot Freres, Paris 1862. 

Burnet. History of the Reformation. Oxford 1865. 

Butler, Charles. Historical Memoirs Respecting the 
English, Irish, and Scottish Catholics. 2 vols. Lon 
don 1819. 

Carwithen. History of the Church of England. Parker, 
Oxford 1849. 

Catalogue of the British Museum. 

Catalogue of the Noble and Royal Authors of England. 
2 vols. London MDCCLIX. Vol. I. 

Censura Literaria. London 1805. 

Cobbett, William. History of the Protestant Reforma 
tion in England and Ireland. Philadelphia 1825. 

Collier, Jeremy. Ecclesiastical History of Great Brit 
ain. Keble, London 1714. 

Collier, J. Payne. A Biographical and Critical Ac 
count of the Rarest Books in the English Language. 
2 vols. Lilly, London 1865. 

Craly. Luther and the Reformation. London 1858. 

Creighton, M. History of the Papacy during the 
Period of the Reformation. Oxon. and Cambridge 

D Aubigne. The Reformation. Translated by Gill. 
London 1890. 

Bibliography 139 

Dibdin, Thomas Frognall. Typographical Antiquities, 
or The History of Printing in England, Scotland, 
and Ireland, by Joseph Ames, William Herbert, etc. 
London 1812. 

Dixon, Richard Watson. History of the Church of 
England. London 1884. 

Dodd. The Church History of England. 3 vols. Brus 
sels 1737. 

Du Pin. Ecclesiastical History of the Sixteenth Cen 
tury. London 1703. 

Ellis, H. Preface to Polydore Vergil s English His 
tory, in the Camden Society s Publications. 

English Catholic Truth Society. Popery on Every Coin 
of the Realm. 

Facciolati, Eorcellini. Totius Latinitatis Lexicon. 4 
vols. Patavii 1771. 

Fisher, George P. The Reformation. Scribner, ~New 
York 1884. 

Flanagan, Thomas. A History of the Church in Eng 
land. Baker, London 1857. 

Foxe, John. The Acts and Monuments of. 8 vols. 
Religious Tract Society, London. 

Fuller. Church History of Britain. 3 vols. London 

Gairdner, James. History of the English Church in 
the Sixteenth Century. Macmillan, London 1903. 

Gardiner, Samuel R. English History for Students, by 
J. Bass Mullinger. Holt, New York 1881. 

Gasquet, Francis Aiden. The Eve of the Reformation. 
Nimmo, London 1900. 

Henry VIII. and the English Monasteries. 2 vols. 
Hodges, London 1893. 

Old English Bible. Nimmo, London 1897. 

Green, John Richard. History of the English People. 
Macmillan, London 1878. 

140 Bibliography 

Griininger, Jean. Repertoire Bibliographique Stras- 
bourgeois. Jusque vers 1530. 

Hall, Edw. Henry VIII. 2 vols. Grafton Press, 
New York and London 1905. 

Hallam. Constitutional History of England. New 
York 1857. 

Hardwick, Charles, M.A. A History of the Christian 
Church during the Kef ormation : by W. Stubbs, M.A. 
Macmillan, 1877. 

Harpsfield, Nicholas, by Pocock. A Treatise on the 
Pretended Divorce between Henry VIII. and Cath 
arine of Aragon. Camden So., 1878. 

Hausser, L. The Period of the Eeformation. 2 vols. 
London 1873. 

Henry VIII. of England, Chronicle of King. Trans 
lated by Martin A. Sharp Hume. London 1889. 

Herbert of Cherbury, Lord. England under Henry 
VIII. London 1870. 

Life and Eeign of Henry VIII. London 1741. 

Herbert, Henry William. Memoirs of Henry VIII. 
Porter & Coates, Philadelphia 1880 V 

Hergenroether, Joseph. Histoire de PEglise. Tomes 8. 
Delhomme et Briguet, Paris et Lyon 1894. 

Heylin, Peter. Ecclesia Kestaurata. 2 vols. Cam 
bridge 1849. 

Holinshed s Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ire 
land. 6 vols. London 1808. 

Hutton, W. H. Sir Thomas More. London 1895. 

Janssen. History of the German People. St. Louis 

Lewis, John. Life of Dr. John Fisher. 2 vols. Lon 
don 1855. 

Lilly. Renaissance Types. Longmans, New York 

Lingard. History of England. Dolman, London 1849. 

Bibliography 141 

Lowndes, William T. Biographical Manual of English 

Literature. In 8 parts, 4 vols. London 1859. 
Luders, in Archseologia, XIX., p. 1. 
Maitland, S. K. The Keformation. Eivington, Lon 
don 1849. 
Mason, Arthur J. Letters on Colet, Fisher, and More. 

London 1895. 

Mayor. Fisher s Works. London 1876. 
Migne. Dictionnaire de Bibliographie Catholique. 

Tom. I. Paris 1858. 
Milner. History of the Church of Christ. 5 vols. 

Mallory & Co., Boston 1811. 
Moberly. Epochs of Modern History. The Early 

Tudors. Longmans, London 1887. 
Moore, A. L. Letters and Papers on the History of the 

Reformation in England and on the Continent. 

Kegan Paul, Trench, Triibner & Co., London 1890. 
Moreri, Louis. Le Grand Dictionnaire Historique. 10 

vols. Paris 1759. 
Natalis, Alexandri. Historia Ecclesiastica. Tom. X. 

Venetiis 1778. 
Nicolas, 1ST. H. Privy Purse Expenses of King Henry 

VIII. London 1827. 
Overton. The Church in England. Gardner, London 

Pallavicini. Histoire du Concile de Trente. Tomes 

III. Migne 1844. 
Panzer, G. W. Annales Typographic!. 11 vols. Norem- 

bergse 1803. 
Paton, James. British History and Papal Claims. 2 

vols. London 1893. 

Pocock, Nicholas. Burners History of the Reforma 
tion. Oxford 1865. 

Preface to "The Pretended Divorce between Henry 

VIII. and Catharine of Aragon." Camden So., 1878. 

142 Bibliography 

Price, Thomas. History of Protestant Nonconformity 

in England. 2 vols. London 1838. 
Rohrbacher, Renatus. Histoire Universel de 1 Eglise 

Catholique. Cinquieme edition. Gaume Freres et 

Duprey, Paris 1868. 
Roscoe, William. The Life and Pontificate of Leo X. 

2 vols. Bonn, London 1885. 
Saconay, Gabriel de. Preface to the Assertio. Lyons 


Sample. Beacon Lights of the Reformation. Philadel 
phia 1889. 
Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. New 

York 1895. 
Seckendorf. Lutheranismi Historia. Francofurti et 

Lypsi* MDCXCII. 
Seebohm, Frederick. Oxford Reformers of 1498. 

Longmans, 1867. 

Sir Thomas More and Henry VIII. s Book against 

Luther. Fortnightly Review, Vol. III., new series, 

January June, 1868. 

The Era of Protestant Revolution. Scribner, New 

York 1874. 
Speed, John. The History of Great Britain. Dawson, 

London 1632. 
Stapleton, Thomas. Tres Thomse Coloniae Agrippinse. 

Steuart, Agnes M. Life and Letters of Sir Thomas 

More. London 1876. 

Strype, John. Ecclesiastical Memorials. 6 vols. Ox 
ford 1822. 

Memorials of Thomas Cranmer. 2 vols. Oxford 

Thomson, A. T. Memoirs of the Court of Henry VIII. 

2 vols. Longmans, 1826. 
Turner. Henry VIII. London 1827. 

Bibliography 143 

Tytler. Henry VIII. London 1854. 

Walter, W. J. Sir Thomas More. Lucas, Baltimore. 

Watts, Kobert. Bibliotheca Britannica. In 2 parts. 

Edinburgh 1824. 
Wetzer et Welte. Dictionnaire de la Theologie Catho- 

lique. Vol. X. Paris 1864. 
Williams, Folkstone. Lives of the English Cardinals. 

Allen, London 1868. 
Wordsworth, Christopher. Ecclesiastical Biography. 4 

vols. 3d edition. London 1839. 
Worsley. Dawn of the Reformation. London 1890. 




EVERY Person in the least conversant with ecclesias 
tical History, or indeed with the civil History of Eng 
land, must know that Martin Luther himself, remark 
able a Man as he was, was not more so than the royal 
Author of the following Work: Nor can a Reader of 
either Species of History be unacquainted with those 
fatal Confusions, Animosities and Devastations, that 
were consequent of, and owed their Rise to, that Mode 
of Religion introduced by the former, and in a great 
Measure established by the latter in these three King 

We shall not enter into a Detail, at large of those 
Springs and Motives that were the efficient Cause of 
the Reformation (as it is called) in the old Religion: 
We shall only observe, very briefly, that, antecedently 
to that most remarkable Revolution, some of the Clergy, 
sunk in that Sloth which great Affluence is but too apt 
to generate in the human Mind, became so relaxed in 
Discipline, and in the Duties in general of their holy 
Profession, that there was a real Necessity for a Refor 
mation of Manners. Pampered Sloth not only begets a 
Looseness of Morals, but is often the Father of Ignor 
ance ; and thus too many of the sacred Order, not only 
did not practise, but were really, even in Speculation 
and Knowledge, Strangers to their Duty. The few 
(comparatively the few) Learned and Virtuous saw and 
lamented the almost general Depravity of the Times; 
and it is probable that Luther, at first, meant no more 
than to expose and correct the Enormities which he 
every where saw practised : But, puffed up with a Con- 

148 Advertisement 

ceit of his own Abilities ; (which indeed were far from 
being contemptible) he, from endeavouring to reform 
particular Abuses, which no way concerned the Essence 
of Religion, (though they threw a Stain on many of its 
Members) at length set about a Reformation of Religion 
itself; and came to think his own Knowledge in Divin 
ity superior to that of the whole aggregate Church. The 
Ambition of, and Contests between some of the Ger 
manic Princes, concerning Matters of a civil Nature, 
were favourable to his Views ; and, in the Career of his 
newly-broached Opinions, inconsistent as they were, one 
with the other, he prevailed so far as to engage the 
Power of Magistracy in their Propagation and Defence. 
All Europe stood astonished, when it beheld Armies of 
military Apostles enforcing an Obedience to the wild 
and incoherent Notions of a vain, obstinate, self-willed 
and enthusiastic Clergyman. The People that were de 
termined not to quit the old Road to Heaven, thought 
themselves obliged to defend the antient Religion, by 
the like Means; and thus a general Warfare sprang, 
from the Petulancy and fiery Zeal of an Individual. 
The learned and virtuous Part of the Clergy employed 
their Zeal, and exerted their Talents, on this alarming 
Occasion; and demonstrated to the World, that the 
Deviations from good Morals could be no just Founda 
tion for a Separation from that Religion, which had the 
Promise of Christ for its Support and Existence, whilst 
the World should last. 

Henry the Eighth was a Prince of great Learning, 
considering the Age in which he lived. He had well 
studied both Philosophy and Divinity, in his Youth; 
his Father, Henry the Seventh, having intended him for 
the ecclesiastical State. His Writings against Luther, 
(I mean the following Work, so much approved of by 
Pope Leo the Tenth) shew a Fund of ecclesiastical 
Erudition, and a Strength of Understanding, uncom- 

Advertisement 149 

mon in Persons of his high Station. It must, indeed, 
be acknowledged, that they breathe too much of the 
Spirit of Acrimony, and run into a Latitude of Abuse, 
ever disgustful to Readers of Taste, Moderation and 
Candour : But let it be remembered, at the same Time, 
That extreme Virulency, Insolence and Self-sufficiency, 
almost every where, mark the Writings of Luther and 
his Fellow-reformers: That those Reformers having 
thus led the Way, their Opponents thought themselves 
justified in retaliating the Abuse, with which they had 
been attacked: And that the Manners of those distant 
Times, wherein polemical Disputes about Religion were 
so strongly and warmly agitated, differ very widely 
from those of the present more enlightened and more 
moderate Age. 

Luther was not less inflamed, by the Censure of the 
University of Paris (a), to whose Judgment he had 
submitted his Writings, with great Elogies, and who 
had condemned his Doctrine in above an hundred Prop 
ositions ; than he was to find that the King of England 
had written against him. His Answer abounds with 
(b) "heinous Affronts and injurious Lies, in almost 

every Page. This Writing did its Author no 

Honour, even among those of his own Party ; even his 
Friends were scandalized at the injurious Contempt, 
with which he treated all that was most august in the 
Universe, and at the whimsical Manner, in which he 
judged of Points of Doctrine." 

Henry was a pious and zealous Roman Catholic, until 
such Times as he suffered himself to be borne away by 
an immoderate Passion for Women, and found his 
Solicitations at Rome for a Divorce from his Queen, 
Katherine of Arragon, absolutely fruitless. Then it 
was that he broke all Measures with the holy See ; and 

(a) Historical Account of the Reformation (from Fleury s Ecclesi 
astical History,) printed in Corke, 1764. (6) Id. p. 136. 

150 Advertisement 

he, who had been a powerful and firm Defender of the 
Church, became the Corner-stone, in England, of that 
Keformation which he had so warmly and strenuously 

Notwithstanding this Falling-off, however, his De 
fence of the seven Sacraments is a Work of considerable 
Merit. Its Orthodoxy we cannot doubt of, when we 
read the Pope s Bull, granting him the most honourable 
and glorious Title of DEFENDER OF THE FAITH; 
a Title still retained by his Successors on the Throne, 
though of a contrary Religion. Although it is not to be 
doubted but that subsequent Writers have handled the 
Subject-matter of this Book with more Accuracy, Clear 
ness and Precision; yet the Work before us may not 
only be very profitably perused, but is also extremely 
curious, when we consider its Author s very remarkable 
and inconsistent Character. The London Edition, from 
whence the present is taken, has been carefully corrected 
throughout, in the Orthography and Punctuation, and 
the Text, obscure in some Parts, hath been elucidated, 
without deviating, however, from the Sense of the 
Author. Upon the Whole, we may venture to affirm, 
that this Edition is vastly preferable to all former Ones, 
in the English Tongue ; and we flatter ourselves with the 
Hope, that the Pains we have taken, in the Publication 
of a Work, hitherto so extremely scarce, will be satis 
factory to the Curious. 

1D1F1F1!, letter to %eo . on tbe 
Subject of tbe "Hesertio" 

Most Holy Father: I most humbly commend myself 
to you, and devoutly kiss your blessed feet. Whereas 
we believe that no duty is more incumbent on a Catholic 
sovereign than to preserve and increase the Christian 
faith and religion and the proofs thereof, and to trans 
mit them preserved thus inviolate to posterity, by his 
example in preventing them from being destroyed by 
any assailant of the faith or in any wise impaired, so 
when we learned that the pest of Martin Luther s heresy 
had appeared in Germany and was raging everywhere, 
without let or hindrance, to such an extent that many, 
infected with its poison, were falling away, especially 
those whose furious hatred rather than their zeal for 
Christian truth had prepared them to believe all its 
subtleties and lies, we were so deeply grieved at this 
heinous crime of the German nation (for whom we have 
no light regard), and for the sake of the Holy Apostolic 
See, that we bent all our thoughts and energies on up 
rooting in every possible way, this cockle, this heresy 
from the Lord s flock. When we perceived that this 
deadly venom had advanced so far and had seized upon 
the weak and ill-disposed minds of so many that it 
could not easily be overcome by a single effort, we 
deemed that nothing could be more efficient in destroy 
ing the contagion than to declare these errors worthy of 
condemnation, after they had been examined by a con 
vocation of learned and scholarly men from all parts of 
our realm. This course of action we likewise recom- 

letter to %eo f. on tbe Subject of tbe 


Beatissime pater. Post humillimam commenda- 
tionem et devotissima pedum oscula beatomm. Quoniam 
nihil magis ex Catholic! principis officio esse arbitra- 
mur, quam ut christianam fidem et religionem atque 
documenta ita servet et augeat, suoque exemplo posteris 
sic intemerate servanda tradat, ut a nullo fidei eversore 
tolli, seu quovis pacto ea labef actari sinat ; ubi primum 
Martini Lutheri pestem atque hBeresim in Germania 
exortam, ubique locoruni cohibente nullo sensimus 
debacchari, adeo ut suo veneno infecti plures contabes- 
cerent, et hi prsesertim qui odio potius intumentes quam 
christianse veritatis zelo ad ipsius versutiis atque men- 
daciis credendum omni se ex parte aptaverant; atrox 
istud scelus turn germanicse nationis (cui non medio- 
criter afficimur), turn vero sacrosanctse apostolicse sedis 
gratia sic indoluimus ut cogitationes omnes nostras, 
studium et animum eo diverteremus, hanc zizaniam, 
hanc hseresim e dominico grege, quacumque ratione fieri 
posset, funditus tollere nitentes. Sed cum exitiale hoc 
virus eo progressum imbecillosque multorum ac male 
affectos animos sic jam occupasse videremus, ut uno im- 
petu haud facile tolli posset; nihil seque huic delendse 
pesti censuimus expedire, quam si doctoribus eruditiori- 
busque hujus regni viris undique excitis trutinandos hos 
errores, ac dignos qui perderentur esse declararemus, 
aliisque compluribus hoc idem faciendum suaderemus; 
in primisque Csesaream Majestatem, ob fratemam quam 
illi gerimus aifectionem, omnesque principes electores ut 

154 Henry s Letter to Leo 

mended to a number of others. In the first place, we 
earnestly entreated His Imperial Majesty, through our 
fraternal love for him, and all the electoral princes, to 
bethink them of their Christian duty and their lofty 
station and to destroy this pernicious man, together with 
his scandalous and heretical publications, after his re 
fusal to return to God. But convinced that, in our 
ardor for the welfare of Christendom, in our zeal for 
the Catholic faith and our devotion to the Apostolic See, 
we had not yet done enough, we determined to show 
by our own writings our attitude towards Luther and 
our opinion of his vile books ; to manifest more openly 
to all the world that we shall ever defend and uphold, 
not only by force of arms but by the resources of our 
intelligence and our services as a Christian, the Holy 
Roman Church. For this reason we have thought that 
this first attempt of our modest ability and learning 
could not be more worthily dedicated than to your 
Holiness, both as a token of our filial reverence and an 
acknowledgment of your careful solicitude for the weal 
of Christendom. We feel assured that our first fruits 
will be enhanced in value if it be approved by the whole 
some judgment of your Blessedness. May you live long 
and happily! From our royal palace at Greenwich, 
the twenty-first day of May, 1521. Your Holiness 
most devoted and humble son, Henry, by the grace of 
God King of England and France, and Lord of Ireland. 

Henry s Letter to Leo 155 

christiani officii suique splendoris meminisse, pestifer- 
umque hunc hominem, una cuin f acinorosis hsereticisque 
libellis, postquam ad Deum ainplius redire spernit, 
radicitus vellent extirpare, studiose rogavimus. Sed 
nostro in Christianam rempublicam ardori, in catholi- 
cam fidem zelo, et in apostolicam sedem devotioni non 
satis adhuc fecisse existimantes, propriis quoque nostris 
scriptis quo animo sumus in Lutheruin, quodve de im- 
probis ejus libellis nostrum sit judicium, innuere volu- 
imus, omnibusque apertius demonstrare, nos sanctam 
Eomanam Ecclesiam non solum vi et armis, sed etiam 
ingenii opibus., christianisque oflBciis in omne tempus 
defensuros ac tutaturos esse. Primam ideo ingenii nos- 
traeque mediocris eruditionis feturam nemini magis 
quam Vestrse Sanctitati dicandam consecrandamque esse 
duximus ; turn ob filialem nostram in earn observantiam, 
turn etiam ob solicitam ipsius christianse reipublicse 
cur am. Hujusmodi autem primitiis nostris plurimum 
accessum iri judicabimus, si sano vestrse beatitudinis 
judicio quse comprobentur dignse habitse fuerint. Et 
felicissime ac diutissime valeat ! E regia nostra Green- 
wici, die XXI. Maii, 1521. E. V. Sanctitatis. Devo- 
tissimus atque obsequentissimus filius Dei gratia Anglise 
et Francise rex ac Dominus Hibernise, Henricus. 

ration of flDr, 3obn Clarfc, 

rator for Ibenn? TPTirf. Iking of EnglanD, ^France ano 
frelano, BefenDer of tbe ffaftb; on bis exhibiting tbis 
TRo^al aBooft, in tbe Consistory at IRome, to pope 

Most Holy Father: 

What great Troubles have been stirred up, by the 
pernicious Opinions of Martin Luther; which of late 
Years first sprung out of the lurking Holes of the Hussi- 
tanian Heresy, in the School of Wittenberg in Ger 
many; from thence spreading themselves over most 
Parts of the Christian World; how many unthinking 
Souls they have deceived, and how many Admirers and 
Adherents they have met with; because these are all 
Things very well known ; and because, in this Place, a 
Medium is more requisite, than Prolixity; I care not 
for relating. Truly, although many of Luther s Works 
are most impiously, by his Libels, spread abroad in the 
World: Yet none of them seems more execrable, more 
venomous, and more pernicious to Mankind, than That, 
entituled, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church; in 
refuting which, many grave and learned Men have dili 
gently laboured. 

My most serene and invincible Prince, Henry VIII. 
King of England, France and Ireland, and most affec 
tionate Son of Your Holiness, and of the sacred Roman 
Church, hath written a Book against this Work of 
Luther s, which he has dedicated to Your Holiness ; and 
hath commanded me to offer, and deliver the same; 

The Oration of Mr. John Clark 157 

which I here present: But before You receive it, most 
holy Father, may it please You, that I speak Somewhat 
of the Devotion and Veneration of my King towards 
Your Holiness, and this most holy See ; as also, of the 
other Reasons which moved him to publish this Work. 
Nor is it amiss to take Notice, in this Place, of this 
horrid and furious Monster; as also of his Stings and 
Poisons, whereby he intends to infect the whole World, 
and to delineate him before Your Holiness in his own 
proper Colours ; that the more formidable the Enemy is, 
and the greater the Danger appears, the more glorious 
may the Triumph shew when that is overcome, and this 
removed. But, O immortal God ! what bitter Language ! 
what so hot and inflamed Force of Speaking can be in 
vented, sufficient to declare the Crimes of that most 
filthy Villain, who has undertaken to cut in Pieces the 
seamless Coat of Christ, and to disturb the quiet State 
of the Church of God ! When, like an excellent 
Esteemer of Things, he attributes to Your Holiness no 
more Power in the Church of God, than to any of the 
least Priests amongst the People; but, like a third 
Cato, fallen from Heaven, most unseasonably condemns 
the Behaviour of all the Ministers in the Church; calls 
Rome a Sinner, wretched, an Adulteress; and lastly, 
Babylon itself! He accuses Your Holiness of Heresy,, 
and makes himself (thrice Apostate) as often as there 
is Question in the Explication of the Christian Faith; 
equal in Authority to St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles ! 
And that he may the better demonstrate himself as great 
an Enemy to Religion, as to Manners, his most impure 
Hands have burnt the Decrees and most holy Statutes 
of the Fathers, in which were contained the true Disci 
pline of a good Life. And, as one most audacious, leav 
ing Nothing unattempted ; he at last publishes this Book 
of the Babylonian Captivity. In which, good God! 

158 The Oration of Mr. John Clark 

what and how prodigious Poison, what deadly Bane, 
how much consuming and mortal Venom this poisonous 
Serpent has spewed out, not only against the wicked 
Manners of our Age, which in some Manner might have 
been borne with; not only against Your Holiness, but 
also against Your Office; against ecclesiastical Hier 
archy, this See, and against that Rock established by 
God himself: finally, against the whole Body of the 
Church of God ! Here, the Bond of Chastity is broken, 
holy Fasts, religious Vows, Rites, Ceremonies, Worship 
of God, Solemnity at Mass, &c. are abolished, and ex 
terminated, by the strangest Perfidiousness that ever 
was heard of. This Man institutes Sacraments after his 
own Fancy, reducing them to three, to two, to one ; and 
that One he handles so pitifully, that he seems to be 
about the reducing of it at last to Nothing at all. O 
Height of Impiety ! O most abominable and most exe 
crable Villainy of Man ! What intolerable Blasphemies, 
from an Heap of Calumnies and Lyes, without any 
Law, Method, or Order, does he utter against God, and 
his Servants, in this Book ! Socrates, a Man judged by 
Apollo s Oracle, to be the wisest of Men, was by the 
Athenians poisoned for disputing against the commonly- 
received Opinion they had of God, and against that 
Religion which was at that Time taught to be the best 
on Earth. Could this Destroyer of Christian Religion 
expect any better from true Christians, for his extreme 
Wickedness against God ? But indeed he did not look 
on it; who, when dreading Punishment (which he well 
deserved) fled, with a Mischief, into his perpetual lurk 
ing Holes in Bohemia, the Mother and Nurse of his 
Heresies. If he had remained, and had not by Your 
Holiness been prohibited the free dispersing abroad of 
his Errors ; what Danger, what devouring Conflagration 
this Plague had brought to all Christendom; let the 

The Oration of Mr. John Clark 159 

Hussitanian Heresy evince ; which though, contented at 
first with small Beginnings, yet, through the Neglect of 
Superiors, increased to such a Height, that at last it 
turned, not only Cities, and People, but also that most 
populous Kingdom of Bohemia, from the Christian 
Faith; reducing it to that Misery, under which it now 
languishes. What can we think would be the End of 
this raging Mischief, which is carried on with such 
Violence and unbridled Fury, in his Prceludiums, as he 
calls them ; as if some Erynnis were sent from Hell in a 
Trice to confound all before it, and so rapidly trans 
ported, as if it would seem to leave Nothing whereon to 
exercise future Fury? which, tracing the Steps of the 
Hussites, has added so much Poison to them, that now 
the Enemy appears more formidable, by how much 
more he equalizes all Arch-heretics in his Doctrine, and 
surpasses them in his malicious and wicked Intentions : 
Indeed the Danger is also so much the greater, as it is 
easier to add worse Proceedings to bad Beginnings, than 
to begin 111 ; and to increase Inventions, than to invent. 
But Your Holiness, most blessed Father, has circum 
spectly taken Care of your Flock; and meeting the 
Smoak, ready to break into open Conflagration and 
Flame, omitted Nothing that might avail to the prevent 
ing so great Evils ; or at first to the Reconciliation of 
their Author; afterwards to his Punishment and Ex 
termination. The great Indignity of this Matter, as also 
Your Holiness s, and the King my Master s Letters, 
moved the Emperor to send this Man, swelled with Con 
tumelies, into Exile. Learned Men, on all Sides, have 
in their Works opposed themselves, as so many Buck 
lers, for the Christian Faith, against the Darts of this 
pernicious Reprobate. 

Let others speak of other Nations, certainly my 
Britainy (called England by our modern Cosmogra- 

160 The Oration of Mr. John Clark 

pliers) situated in the furthermost End of the World, 
and separated from the Continent by the Ocean; as it 
hath never been behind in the Worship of God, and true 
Christian Faith, and due Obedience to the Roman 
Church; either to Spain,, France, Germany, or Italy; 
nay, to Rome itself; so likewise, there is no Nation 
which more impugns this Monster, and the Heresies 
broached by him, and which more condemns, and detests 
them. In which Sort of most excellent Praise, I can 
prefer none to him, whom I have now recorded, King 
Henry, Your Holiness s most devoted Son ; who, as soon 
as he understood, that the Dignity of that Government, 
illustrated by Your Integrity and Virtue, and enlarged 
by Your great Actions ; was, together with the Universal 
Church, so bitterly inveighed against, by this Son of 
Perdition ; not only undertook this pious Work himself , 
whereby he has learnedly confuted the Errors of this 
impious Man; but likewise the most learned Clergy of 
this Realm, have, to the utmost of their Powers, en 
deavoured, with all Diligence, to remove from the 
Hearts of the People all Doubts, Fears and Scruples, 
that might in any wise happen to possess, or trouble the 
Minds of the weaker Sort; so that, amongst us, the 
Church of God is in great Tranquillity ; no Differences, 
no Disputes, no ambiguous Words, Murmurings or Com 
plaints, are heard amongst the People : All Troubles of 
Mind, all Renovations in the World, all vain Horror of 
Antichrist s Reign, are now vanished. 

But now, lest my Discourse may seem too prolix, or 
tedious to the diligent Attention Your Holiness is 
pleased to give ; I shall presently come to a Conclusion. 

Only first be pleased, that I declare the Reason that 
moved my most serene King to undertake this Work. 
For I believe it will cause Admiration in several, that a 
Prince, so much busied with the Cares of his own King- 

The Oration of Mr. John Clark 161 

dom, both at home and abroad ; and whose Affairs afford 
him so little Respite, should undertake such Things, as, 
according to the common Saying, might require to em 
ploy wholly all the Thoughts of a Man, and indeed, of 
such a one, as is no E~ovice neither ; but rather for his 
whole Time experienced in the Studies of Learning: 
Yet, notwithstanding all this, he that considers his great 
Actions done for the Faith of Christ, and his accus 
tomed Reverence towards this holy See, will not think 
it so strange that he, who, with his Forces and revenged 
Sword, has formerly defended the Church of Rome, 
when in greatest Dangers and Calamities of Wars; 
should now, for the Glory of God, and Tranquillity of 
the Roman Church, by his Ingenuity and Pen, put a 
Stop to Heresies, which so endanger the Catholic Faith. 

If no sincere Christian could suffer so great Evils to 
creep into the Church, without opposing all his Forces 
and Studies against them ; what ought not a Prince to 
do, and such a Prince, as, by divine Providence, is ad 
vanced to that Honour and Dignity, as it were, for that 
very Cause, that he might protect the Catholic Faith, 
and maintain the Christian Religion inviolable from 
all pestilential Endeavours ? 

Shall we admire, that Piety should extort from him 
(being both a Christian and a Prince,) what is but the 
Duty of every Christian ? These, most holy Father, are 
the chief Reasons of his entering upon this Work ; his 
accustomed Veneration to Your Holiness; Christian 
Piety in the Cause of God ; and a royal Grief and In 
dignation of seeing Religion trodden under Foot. I 
confess the Desire of Glory might have been able to have 
induced him to these Things ; that as he, who, under the 
Charge of the best Tutors, and a Father none of the 
most indulgent, having passed his younger Days in good 
Learning, and afterwards so well versed in Holy Scrip- 

162 The Oration of Mr. John Clark 

tures, that confiding in his own Abilities, he often, (not 
without great Glory) disputed with the most Learned 
in Britain; might now also, for Glory s Sake, fight in 
the Field of Learning against Martin Luther; a Man 
indeed not illiterate. 

Nor do I see in what else he could, with more Glory 
and Applause, have employed this Treasure of Knowl 
edge ; a Talent, doubtless, given him by God himself for 
this very End. But yet the pious Prince himself does 
modestly acknowledge, in his Preface, how little he at 
tributes to the Force of his own Wit, which is so much 
esteemed by others: For, excusing his Insufficiency in 
Learning, in that Preface, he arrogates no more to him 
self, than to confess that this Task might have been 
much better performed by many others; and that he 
himself, (much unfit, confiding only in the Assistance 
of the divine Goodness) had, through the Instigation of 
Piety, and Grief of seeing Religion so much abused, at 
tempted to discover, by Reason, the Lutheran Heresies: 
Not that he thought it honourable to contend with 
Luther, who is so much despised, hissed at, and cried 
down over the whole World; but that, amongst other 
Things, he might testify to the World what his Opinion 
was of this prodigious Monster, and his Followers; 
thinking himself concerned to publish that in Writing, 
not so much, lest Scruples of Conscience should follow 
his Silence, as, by his Example, to induce others to the 
like Undertakings, who had received a richer Gift of 
Science from the Giver of Light. I confess what the 
Godly Prince has writ against the Errors of Luther 
might compel Luther himself (if he had the least Spark 
of Christian Piety in him) to recant his Heresies, and 
recall again the straying and almost forlorn Flock, not 
only from Errors, but from Hell itself, where it miser 
ably runs head-long. But what can be done, where 

The Oration of Mr. John Clark 163 

Pharaoh s Heart is hardened ; where the Wound 
stinks with Putrefaction ; where Wickedness, Lying 
to itself, is become miserable ? being unwilling to hear 
that it should understand, or to understand that it 
should do well. The Change of his Mind, and altering 
his Councils to better, must be a great Miracle of Al 
mighty God; for what learned Men have writ against 
him as yet, does but only irritate him to grow every 
Day worse and worse. Truly, my most serene King is 
so far from expecting any Good from this Idol and vain 
Phantom, that he rather thinks this raging and mad 
Dog is not to be dealt with by Words, there being no 
Hopes of his Conversion, but with drawn Swords, Can 
nons, and other Habiliments of War ; (such as he would 
use against the Turks themselves; if Time permitted,) 
that, being constrained by due Punishment, he might be 
reduced, if not to Amendment, at least to Fear. And 
because, most Holy Father, the King could not revenge 
with the Sword, God s Cause and Yours ; He takes other 
Arms, and enters the Field of Learning; not in this 
Kind of Combat, like another Hercules, to fight against 
this Hydra; but because this Viper s Madness rages no 
where more to the Dishonour of God, than in his Book 
of the Babylonian Captivity ; nor seems he, any where 
else, by his deceitful Arguments, more to endanger 
weaker Judgments. Having therefore begun to batter 
down this Work, he assaults it with the Force and En 
gines of his Arguments ; therein performing the Office of a 
pious, magnanimous General, whose Duty in military Dis 
cipline, is to supply his Soldiers with most Auxiliaries, 
where the Enemy presses on with greatest force. Which 
Work of his, though it had the Approbation of the most 
Learned of his Kingdom ; yet he resolved not to publish 
until Your Holiness (from whom we ought to receive 
the Sense of the Gospel, by Your quick and most sub- 

164 The Oration of Mr. John Clark 

lime Judgment) deem it worthy to pass through the 
Hands of Men. May therefore Your Holiness take in 
good Part, and graciously accept this little Book, sent 
and submitted to Your Examination: In which, the 
pious, and Your most devoted Prince, has, with all his 
Power, endeavoured to procure, in some Manner, that 
weaker Understandings should not be drawn out of the 
Way, by the most wicked Works of this perverse Man ; 
and hopes so to have acquitted himself, as at least he 
may appear to have demonstrated his Veneration 
towards the Christian Keligion, and towards Your Holi 

flfeost 1bol$ Bisbop Hnevoeret) in 
Gbese Morfcs 

WE receive this Book with great Joy: Truly it is 
such, as nothing could have been sent more acceptable 
to Us, and our venerable Brethren. But, indeed, we 
know not whether more to praise, or to admire, that 
most potent, prudent and truly most Christian King; 
who, with his Sword, has totally subdued the Enemies 
of Christ s Church, Enemies, who like the Heads of the 
Hydra, often cut off, and forthwith growing up again ; ) 
have often endeavoured to tear in Pieces the seamless 
Coat of Christ; and, at Length, the Enemies being van 
quished, hath settled in Peace the Church of God, and 
this Holy See. And now, his Majesty having the 
Knowledge, Will, and Ability of composing This excel 
lent Book against this terrible Monster, has rendered 
himself no less admirable to the whole World, by the 
Eloquence of his Style, than by his great Wisdom. We 
render immortal Thanks to our Creator, who has raised 
up such a Prince, to defend His Church and this Holy 
See; most humbly beseeching Him bountifully to bestow 
on this Great Prince, a most happy Life, and all other 
good Things that he can wish for; and after his Exit 
from this transitory Life, to crown him in his coalestial 
Kingdom, with a Crown of Eternal Glory. We, to our 
Power, by God s Assistance, shall not be wanting in the 
Performance of any Thing, that may tend to the 
Honour and Dignity of his Majesty, and to His and 
his Kingdom s Glory. 

pope s Bull 

fceo, . JBisbop an& Servant of tbe Servants of <5oo : Go 
our rnoet oear Son in Cbrist, "fcenrB, tbe illustrious 
fting of Bnglano, ano H>efenoer of tbe ffaitb, senos 
Greeting, ano gives bis JSeneoiction. 

BY the good Pleasure and Will of Almighty God, 
presiding in the Government of the Universal Church, 
though unworthy so great Charge. We daily employ all 
our Thoughts, both at home and abroad, for the con 
tinual Propagation of the Holy Catholic Faith, without 
which none can be saved. And that the Methods which 
are taken for repressing of such as labour to overthrow 
the Church, or pervert, and stain her by wicked Glosses, 
and malicious Lies ; may be carried on with continual 
Profit, as is ordered by the sound Doctrine of the Faith 
ful, and especially of such as shine in the regal Dignity : 
We employ with all our Power, our Endeavours, and all 
the Parts of our Ministry. 

And as the other Roman Bishops, our Predecessors, 
have been accustomed to bestow some particular Favours 
upon Catholic Princes, as the Exigencies of Affairs and 
Times required, especially on those who, in tempestuous 
Times, and whilst the rapid Perfidiousness of Schis 
matics and Heretics raged, not only persevered con 
stantly in the true Faith, and unspotted Devotion of the 
holy Roman Catholic Church; but also as the Legiti 
mate Sons and stoutest Champions of the same, have 
opposed themselves, both spiritually and temporally, 
against the mad Fury of Schismatics and Heretics: So 
also, We, for your Majesty s most excellent Works, and 

ffiulla pro ftitulo Defensoris ffod* 

Xeo ;6pf0copu0 Senws Servorum Dei, Cartesfmo in Cbti6to 
ffilio, Denrico Bn0U*e 1Re0f, ffi&ei S>efensori, Salutem 
et Bpoatoltcam JBcneDtctionem. 

Ex supernae dispositionis arbitrio, licet imparibus 
meritis, Universalis Ecclesia? Eegimini Prsesidentes, ad 
hoc cordis nostri longe lateque diffundimus cogitatus, 
ut Fides Catholica, sine qua nemo proficit ad Salutem, 
continuum suscipiat Incrementum, et ut ea, quse pro 
cohibendis conatibus Ilium deprimere aut pravis men- 
dacibusque comentis pervertere et denigrare molien- 
tium, sana Christi Fidelium, prsesertim Dignitate 
Eegali Fulgentium, Doctrina sunt disposita, continuis 
perficiant Incrementis, Partes nostri Ministerii et 
Operam impendimus efficaces. 

Et, sicut alii Komani Pontifices, Prsedecessores 
nostri, Catholicos Principes (prout Rerum et Tem- 
porum qualitas exigebat) specialibus favoribus prosequi 
consueverunt, illos praBsertim, qui procellosis tempori- 
bus, et rapida Scismaticorum et Hsereticorum fervente 
perftdia, non solum in Fidei Serenitate et Devotione 
illibata Sacrosanctae Romans Ecclesiss immobiles per- 
stiterunt verum etiam, tanquam ipsius Ecclesiae legitimi 
Filii, ac fortissimi Athleta?, Scismaticorum et Hsereti- 
corum insanis Furoribus spiritualiter et temporaliter 
se opposuerunt ; ita etiam nos Majestatem tuam, propter 
Excelsa et Immortalia ejus erga Nos et hanc Sanctam 
Sedem, in qua, Permissione Divina, sedemus, opera et 
*Rymeri Feeders, Tom. VI., par. I., p. 199. 

168 The Popes Bull 

worthy Actions done for Us, and this Holy See, in 
which by divine Permission we preside; do desire to 
confer upon your Majesty, with Honour and immortal 
Praises, That, which may enable and engage you care 
fully to drive away from our Lord s Flock the Wolves; 
and cut off with the material Sword, the rotten Members 
that infect the mystical Body of Jesus Christ, and con 
firm the Hearts of the almost discomforted Faithful in 
the Solidity of Faith. Truly when our beloved Son 
John Clark, your Majesty s Orator, did lately in our 
Consistory, in presence of our venerable Brethren, Car 
dinals of the sacred Roman Church, and divers others 
holy Prelates; present unto Us, a Book, which Your 
Majesty, moved by your Charity, (which effects every 
Thing readily and well,) and enflamed with Zeal to the 
holy Catholic Faith, and Fervour of Devotion towards 
Us, and this Holy See; did compose, as a most noble 
and wholesome Antidote against the Errors of divers 
Heretics, often condemned by this Holy See, and now 
again revived by Martin Luther : When, I say, he offered 
this Book to Us, to be examined, and approved by Our 
Authority; and also declared, in a very eloquent Dis 
course, That, as Your Majesty, had by true Reasons, 
and the Undeniable Authority of Scripture, and 
holy Fathers, confuted the notorious Errors of LUTHER ; 
so you are likewise ready, and resolved to prose 
cute, with all the Forces of your Kingdom, those 
who shall presume to follow, or defend them; having 
found in this Boole most admirable Doctrine, sprinkled 
with the Dew of Divine Grace; We rendered infinite 
Thanks to Almighty God, from whom every good Thing, 
and every perfect Gift proceeds, for being pleased to 
fill with his Grace, and to inspire your most excellent 
Mind, inclined to all Good, to defend, by your Writings, 
his Holy Faith, against the new Broacher of those con- 

Bulla pro Titulo Defensoris Fidei 169 

gesta, condignis et immortalibus prseconiis et laudibus 
efferre desideramus, ac ea sibi concedere propter quse 
invigilare debeat a Grege Dominico Lupos arcere, et 
putida membra, quas Mysticum Christ! Corpus inficiunt, 
ferro et material! gladio abscindere, et nutantium corda 
Fidelium in Fide! soliditate confirmare. 

Sane cum nuper Dilectus Filius Johannes Clerk, 
Majestatis tuse apud Nos Orator, in Consistorio nostro, 
coram Venerabilibus Fratribus nostris Sanctse Romanes 
Ecclesise Cardinalibus, et compluribus aliis Romanae 
Curise Prajlatis, Librum, quem Majestas tua, charitate 
quse omnia sedulo et nihil perperam agit, Fideique 
Catholicse zelo accensa, ac Devotionis erga Nos et hanc 
Sanctam Sedem fervore innammata, contra Errores 
diversorum Hsereticorum, ssepius ab hac Sancta Sede 
Damnatos, nuperque per Martinum Lutherum susci- 
tatos et innovates, tanquam nobile ac salutare quoddam 
antidotum, composuit, isTobis examinandum, et deinde 
Auctoritate nostra approbandum, obtulisset, ac lucu- 
lenta Oratione sua exposuisset, Majestatem tuam para- 
tarn ac dispositam esse ut, quemadmodum veris Ration- 
ibus ac irrefragabilibus Sacrse Scripturse et Sanctorum 
Patrum Auctoritatibus notorios Errores ejusdem Mar 
tini confutaverat, ita etiam omnes eos sequi et defensare 
prassumentes totius Regni sui viribus et armis perse- 
quatur : 

Nosque ejus Libri admirabilem quandam et co3lestis 
Gratia3 rore conspersam, Doctrinam diligenter accu- 
rateque introspeximus, Omnipotent! Deo, a quo omne 
Datum optimum et omne Donum perfectum est, im- 
mensas Gratias egimus, qui optimam et ad omne bonum 
inclinatam mentem tuam inspirare, eique tantam 
Gratiam superne infundere dignatus fuit, ut ea 
scriberes quibus Sanctam ejus Fidem contra novum 
Errorum Damnatorum hujusmodi Suscitatorem defen- 

170 The Pope s Bull 

demned Errors; and to invite all other Christians, by 
your Example, to assist and favour, with all their 
Power, the orthodox Faith, and evangelical Truth, now 
under so great Peril and Danger. 

Considering that it is but Just, that those, who under 
take pious Labours, in Defence of the Faith of Christ, 
should be extolled with all Praise and Honour; and 
being willing, not only to magnify with deserved Praise, 
and approve with our Authority, what your Majesty 
has with Learning and Eloquence writ against Luther; 
but also to Honour your Majesty with such a Title, as 
shall give all Christians to understand, as well in our 
Times, as in succeeding Ages, how acceptable and wel 
come Your Gift was to Us, especially in this Juncture 
of Time: We, the true Successor of St. Peter, (whom 
Christ, before his Ascension, left as his Vicar upon 
Earth, and to whom he committed the Care of his 
Flock) presiding in this Holy See, from whence all 
Dignity and Titles have their Source; have with our 
Brethren maturely deliberated on these Things; and 
with one Consent unanimously decreed to bestow on 
your Majesty this Title, viz. Defender of the Faith. 
And, as we have by this Title honoured you ; we likewise 
command all Christians, that they name your Majesty 
by this Title; and that in their Writings to your Maj 
esty, immediately after the Word KING, they add, 
weighed, and diligently considered your singular Mer 
its, we could not have invented a more congruous Name, 
nor more worthy Your Majesty, than this worthy and 
most excellent Title; which, as often as you hear, or 
read, you shall remember your own Merits and Virtues : 
Nor will you, by this Title, exalt yourself, or become 
proud, but, according to your accustomed Prudence, 
rather more humble in the Faith of Christ; and more 

Bulla pro Titulo Defensoris Fidel 171 

deres, ac reliquos Reges et Principes Christianos tuo 
exemplo invitares lit ipsi etiam Orthodoxse Fidei et 
Evangelicse Veritati, in periculum et discrimen ad- 
ductse, omni ope sua adesse opportuneque f avere vellent ; 
sequum autem esse censentes eos, qui pro Fidei Christi 
hujusmodi Defensione pios Labores susceperunt, omni 
Laude et Honore afficere; Volentesque non solum ea, 
qua3 Majestas tua contra eundem Martinum Lutherum 
absolutissima Doctrina nee minori Eloquentia scripsit, 
condignis laudibus extollere ae magnificare, Auctori- 
tateque nostra approbare et confirmare, sed etiam Ma- 
jestatem ipsam tali Honore et Titulo decorare, ut 
nostris ac perpetuis futuris temporibus Christi Fideles 
omnes intelligant quam gratum acceptumque Nobis 
fuerit Majestatis tuce munus, hoc prsesertim tempore 
nobis oblatum ; 

~Nos qui Petri, quem Christus, in coalum ascensurus, 
Vicarium suum in Terris reliquit, et cui curam Gregis 
sui commisit, veri Successores sumus, et in hac Sancta 
Sede, a qua omnes Dignitates ac Tituli emanant, 
sedemus, habita super his cum eisdem Fratribus nostris 
matura Deliberatione, de eorum unanimi Consilio et 
Assensu, Majestati iuoe Titulum hunc (videlicet) FIDEI 
DEFENSOEEM donare decrevimus, prout Te tali Titulo 
per Prgesentes insignimus; Mandantes omnibus Christi 
Fidelibus ut Majestatem tuam hoc Titulo nominent, et 
cum ad earn scribent, post Dictionem Regi adjungant 

Et profecto, hujus Tituli excellentia et dignitate ac 
singularibus Meritis tuis diligenter perpensis et con- 
sideratis, nullum neque dignius neque Majestati tuce 
convenientius nornen excogitare potuissemus, quod quo- 
tiens audies aut leges, totiens proprise Yirtutis opti- 
mique Meriti tui recordaberis ; nee hujusmodi Titulo 
intumesces vel in Superbiam elevaberis, sed solita tua 

172 The Popes Bull 

strong and constant in your Devotion to this Holy See, 
by which you were exalted. And you shall rejoice in 
our Lord, who is the Giver of all good Things, for leav 
ing such a perpetual and everlasting Monument of your 
Glory to Posterity, and shewing the Way to others, that 
if they also covet to be invested with such a Title, they 
may study to do such Actions, and to follow the Steps 
of your most excellent Majesty; Whom, with your 
Wife, Children, and all w r ho shall spring from you, We 
bless with a bountiful and liberal Hand ; in the Name of 
Him from whom the Power of Benediction is given to 
Us, and by whom Kings reign, and Princes govern; and 
in whose Hands are the Hearts of Kings : 

Praying, and beseeching the most High, to confirm 
your Majesty in your most holy Purposes, and to aug 
ment your Devotion ; and for your most excellent Deeds 
in Defence of his Holy Faith, to render your Majesty 
so illustrious and famous to the whole World, as that 
our Judgment in adorning you with so remarkable a 
Title, may not be thought vain, or light, by any Person 
whatsoever; and finally, after you have finished your 
Course in this Life, that he may make you Partaker of 
his eternal Glory. It shall not be lawful for any Person 
whatsoever, to infringe, or by any rash Presumption 
to act contrary to This Letter of Subscribing, and Com 
mand. But, if any one shall presume to make such 
Attempt ; let him .know, that he shall thereby incur the 
Indignation of Almighty God, and of the holy Apostles, 
Peter and Paul. 

Given at St. Peter s in Home, the fifth of the Ides of 
October; In the Year of our Lord s Incarnation 1521, 
and in the ninth Year of our Papacy. 

Build pro Tiiulo Defensoris Fidel 173 

Prudentia humilior, et in Fide Christ! ac Devotione 
hujus Sanctse Sedis, a qua exaltatus fueris, fortior et 
const antior evades, ac in Domino bonomm omnium 
Largitore Isetaberis perpetuum hoc et immortale Glorise 
tuse Monumentum Posteris tuis relinquere, illisque viam 
ostendere ut, si tali Titulo ipsi quoque insigniri opta- 
bunt, talia etiam Opera efficere, prseclaraque Majestatis 
iuo3 Vestigia sequi studeant, quam, prout de Nobis et 
dicta Sede optime merita est, una cum Uxore et Filiis, 
ac omnibus qui a Te et ab Illis nascentur, nostra Bene- 
dictione, in Nomine illius, a quo illam concedendi 
Potestas JSTobis data est, larga et liberal! Manu Bene- 
dicentes, Altissimum ilium, qui dixit, per Me Reges 
regnant et Principes imperant, et in cujus manu Cor da 
sunt Regum, rogamus et obsecramus ut earn in suo 
Sancto Proposito confirmet ej usque Devotionem multi- 
plicet, ac prseclaris pro Sancta Fide gestis ita illustret, 
ac toti Orbi Terrarum conspicuam reddat ut Judicium, 
quod de ipsa fecimus, earn tarn insigni Titulo deco- 
rantes, a nemine falsum aut vanum judicari possit; 
Demum, mortalis hujus Vitse finito Curriculo, sempi- 
ternse illius Glorisc consortem atque participein reddat. 

Dat. Rornce apud Sanctum Petrum, Anno Incarna- 
tionis Dominicse Millesimo, Quingentesimo, Vigesimo 
Primo, Quinto Idus Octobris Pontiiicatus nostri anno 

EGO LEO DECIMUS, Catholicce Ecclesice Episcopus. 
Locus Signi. 

letter from Xeo to Tbenr? 1DTI1. 

respecting tbe "IDefence of tbe 

Seven Sacraments" 

1Tn BcfcnowleOement of tbe 3Boofc Timritten bg tbe 
against Xutber 

Most dear Son in Christ, Health and Apostolic Bene 
diction : 

Some days ago, when the envoy of Your Serenity, 
Our beloved Son, John Clark, Dean of the Chapel 
Eoyal, publicly in Consistory presented us the book 
which Your Serenity has published against the impious 
teachings and sect of Martin Luther, and in a brilliant 
address, exceedingly appropriate to the occasion, de 
clared, in the presence of a number of Prelates of the 
Roman Court, your readiness to aid Us and the Holy 
See with sword and pen, our soul was filled with joy. 
Not We alone, but all Our venerable brethren rejoiced, 
as though deeming that Luther s impiety had, not with 
out the divine permission, assailed the Church of 
Christ, so that to her greater glory she might be fortu 
nate enough to find such a champion and defender. 

Hence We have resolved, and all agree in Our de 
cision, that your exceptional virtue and piety should be 
made memorable by some mark of Our love and appre 
ciation. For if it has often been, most dear Son, a 
source of honour to great monarchs to take up arms to 
safeguard the liberty and tranquillity of the Holy Apos 
tolic See, how much more glory and reverence should 
accrue from employing the weapons of the Spirit of 
God and of heavenly science to remove from the faith 

letter from %eo f. to "Ibenrs ID1I1I1K 
respecting tbe "Hssertio Septem 

De <5ratits pro fcibro per TRegem Contra Xutberum 

CHAEISSIME in Christo fill noster, salutem et apos- 
tolicam benedictionem. His prseteritis diebus, cum tuse 
serenitatis Orator dilectus Filius Johannes Clerke 
Capellse regise Decanus in Consistorio nostro palam 
librum eum nobis obtulisset, quern serenitas tua contra 
impiam Martini Lutheri et mentem et sectam edidit, 
atque ipse luculenta maximeque tempori et loco accom- 
modata oratione, prsesentibus etiam pluribus romanse 
CuriaB Praelatis promptum animuni tuum ad nos sanc- 
tamque sedem hanc armis pariter et literis juvandam 
exposuisset, summa anim&e laetitia fuimus affecti ; neque 
nos solum sed omnes venerabiles fratres nostri, quasi 
reputantes non sine permissu divino erupisse adversus 
Christi Ecclesiara Luterianam hanc impietatam, ut ipsa 
ma j ore sua eum gloria talem propugnatorem ac defen- 
sorem sortiri possit. 

Visum itaque fuit cunctis, nobisque ita decernentibus 
ab omnibus est assensum singularem hanc tuam et vir- 
tutem et pietatem aliquo et amoris nostri et grati animi 
monumento esse illustrandam. Etenim, charissime fili 
noster, si arma sumere ut sanctse sedis apostolicse status 
in sua libertate et tranquilitate permaneret tutus, 
magnis ssepe Principibus honori summo fuit, quanto 
magis arma spiritus Dei coelestisque scientise capere, ut 
ea fide Christi tanta labes depellatur, sacramentaque ea 

Pope Leo s Letter to Henry 

of Christ so great a stain, and to preserve inviolate those 
sacraments by which the salvation of souls is secured. 

These two functions, which hitherto We have always 
found separate, have been united in you alone, a mighty 
sovereign, in a most eminent degree ; for you have both 
vindicated the liberty of the Church with your arms, 
and you have evinced your desire to fortify the Chris 
tian faith against impious heresy by the treasures of 
your piety and learning. The one is an evidence of 
invincible and lofty courage, the other of a spirit and 
sense of religion tender, devout, and orthodox. 

In what words, then, or by what manner of eulogy 
shall we praise this piety, this plenitude of doctrine, 
overflowing as though from a celestial fountain ? What 
fit return can we make for your kindness in dedicating 
to us so noble a product of your intellect ? Both con 
siderations exceed the powers of language, or even of 
thought ; nor can we reflect on your services and deserts 
without being overcome. 

What love, what zeal is yours for the defence of 
Christian faith! What benevolence in Our regard! 
And in the book itself, w r hat solidity of matter, clear 
ness of method, force of eloquence, wherein the Holy 
Spirit Himself shows visibly! It is thoroughly judi 
cious, wise, and pious; charitable in instruction, gentle 
in admonition, correct in argument. If there be any 
of your opponents who have not fallen entirely into the 
power of the Prince of Darkness, they must be drawn 
by your writings to a saner condition of mind, if any 
chance for sanity be left. 

These are distinguished and admirable achievements ; 
and as they have been wrought in a new fashion, by a 
princely favour, for Almighty God and the Holy See, we 
render you, "Defender of the Faith, unbounded thanks. 
The Apostolic See thanks you ; all who worship Christ 

Pope Leo s Letter to Henry 177 

quibus animarum salus, inviolata serventur, et laudem 
afferre debet et celebritatem. 

Quamquam hsec duo, quae duximus antea semper 
divisa, in te uno maximo rege praestantissima fuerunt 
conjuncta; idem enim tu et libertatem ecclesiasticam 
tuis armis vindicasti, et tu idem fidem christianam 
thesauris tuae et pietatis et scientiae adversiis impias 
haereses munitam esse voluisti, quorum alterum invictae 
et excelsae animi fortitudinis-, alterum pise et sanctae et 
verse mentis ac religionis fuit; sed nos quibus tandem 
verbis, quo laudum genere, vel hanc pietatem tuam, hanc 
uberrimam velut ex ccelesti fonte doctrinae copiam com- 
mendabimus ; vel tuae erga nos voluntati, qui nobis ipsis 
tarn nobilem partum ingenii tui dicasti, gratias agemus ? 
superat hoc utrumque non solum verba sed etiam cogita- 
tiones nostras nee vero de tuis officiis ac meritis tantum 
possumus animo ooncipere, quin a re vincamur ipsa. 
Qui enim in te amor, quod studium defendend3 chris- 
tiana? fidei ? Quanta erga nos ipsos benevolentia ? quas 
denique operis ipsius gravitas ? qui ordo ? quanta vis 
eloquentise ut sanctum affuisse spiritum appareat; 
omnia plena judicii, plena sapientiae, plena pietatis; in 
docendo charitas, in admonendo mansuetudo, in redar- 
guendo veritas ; ut si homines sint qui a te ref elluntur, 
ac non omnino in pessimi Daemonis potestatem abierunt, 
tuis scriptis ad sanitatem debeant reduci, si modo ullus 
relictus est sanitatis locus. 

Sunt hsec praeclara omnino et admirabilia, quae quo- 
niam a te nova ratione, magnifico munere, Deo maximo 
et huic sanctae sedi elaborata sunt, agimus Majestati 
tuse infinitas gratias, o fidei def ensor ! Agit sedes apos- 
tolica, agunt omnes qui Christum colunt et in ejus fide 

Et nos quidem titulum hunc defensoris fidei, de 
eorumdem venerabilium fratrum nostrorum assensu. 

178 Pope Leo s Letter to Henry 

and unite in His faith thank you. We, for Our part, 
with the concurrence of Our venerable brothers, bestow 
on you, in other letters sealed with lead, as you will find 
from their perusal, this title of Defender of the Faith. 
For your part, most dear Son, however you may con 
sider great and desirable these honours which the Holy 
Apostolic See grants you as a reward of eminent virtue 
and a mark of its grateful appreciation, realize that 
greater and more glorious compensation is prepared for 
you in heaven by Our Lord and Saviour. In upholding 
His cause and His spouse by every means of defence you 
have displayed your spirit and your virtue; and while 
you review those titles which you have acquired on earth 
and in heaven, remember by what claims you have 
gained them. Show yourself hereafter such as you have 
been heretofore. Let your later deeds be equal to your 
sublime and glorious beginnings. Let the Apostolic 
See, once defended by your arms, and the Christian 
faith, now fortified by the shield of your doctrine against 
the criminal frenzy of heretics, find and prove you ever 
a helper in all their perils, so that this extraordinary 
and unspeakable glory which Your Majesty has most 
mightily merited by your great efforts may continue to 
the last day of your life and endure to all future time 
as a theme of eulogy. 

Given at Kome, at St. Peter s, under the seal of the 
Fisherman, the fourth day of November, 1521, the 
ninth year of Our Pontificate. 

On the back : 


To Our Most Christian Son in Christ, Henry, King 
of England, Illustrious Defender of the Faith. 

Pope Leo s Letter to Henry 179 

tibi per alias nostras sub plumbo literas contulimus, ut 
ex ipsis potuisti cognoscere; sed tu, charissime fill, ita 
hos honores quos tibi in prsemium tuse prseclarissimae 
virtutis, in signum suse erga te gratse voluntatis, sancta 
sedes defert apostolica, et magnos et expetendos esse 
puta, ut tamen illis longe major a et prsestantiora arbit- 
rere tibi in ccelo a Domino et Salvatore nostro parata 
prasmia, ejus tu causam et sponsam defendendo omni 
genere tutela? et animum et virtutem tuam adhibuisti; 
ut dum hos in terris quos adeptus es, titulos recensebis, 
et coelestia ilia cogitabis, tecum ipse recordere quibus es 
meritis ista consecutus, talemque te imposterum qualem 
antea prsestes, ac principiis sublimibus et gloriosis pares 
sint exitus, ipsaque sedes apostolica quse olim tuis de- 
fensa armis, fides quoque Christiana qua3 nunc doctrinse 
tuae clypeo adversus sceleratas haereticorum insanias 
communita est, sentiant te eundem semper experian- 
turque adjutorem in periculis suis omnibus, ut istam 
singularem et inenarrabilem gloriam quam majestas 
tua, maximis suis operibus jure optimo promerita est 
ad extremum usque hujus vitse diem et producere possis, 
et earn in omni posteritate pra3dicandam relinquere. 

Datum Roma3 7 apud Sanctum Petrum, sub annulo 
piscatoris, die quart! novembris, millesimo quingen- 
tesimo vicesimo primo, pontificatus nostri anno nono. 

Dorso : 


Charissimo in Christo filio nostro Henrico Angliae 
regi, illustri fidei defensori. 

(Tbe lEpistle Dedicator? 

Go our moat 1bolB %oro Xeo t , cbfef 3Bf8bop t f>enrs t 
"King of Enslano, prance, anD ITrelano, wfsbetb 
perpetual Ibappiness. 

Most Holy Father: 

Perhaps it may appear strange to Your Holiness, 
that Part of our Youth being spent in martial Affairs, 
and Part in the Studies of Things belonging to the 
Common-wealth ; we should now undertake the Task of 
a Man, that ought to have employed all his Time in the 
Studies of Learning; in opposing Ourself against this 
growing Heresy. But Your Holiness (I suppose) will 
the less admire, when You consider the Reasons that 
obliged Us to take upon Us this Charge of Writing. We 
have seen Tares cast into our Lord s Harvest ;* Sects do 
spring up, and Heresies increase so much as almost, to 
overthrow the Faith of Christ : And such Seeds of Dis 
cord are sown abroad in the World, that no sincere 
Christian, can suffer, or endure any longer their spread 
ing Mischiefs, without an Obligation of employing all 
his Studies and Forces to oppose them. Your Holiness 
ought not therefore to wonder, if We (not the greatest 
in Ability, yet in Faith and Good- will inferior to none,) 
have proposed to Ourself, to employ our Force and 
Power in a Work so necessary, and so profitable, that it 
cannot lightly be omitted by any, without Offence ; also 
to declare Our great Respect towards Your Holiness, 
Our Endeavours for the Propagation of the Faith of 
Christ, and Our Obedience to the Service of Almighty 
*Matt. xiii. 25. 

IRegis ab Summum pontificem Cptatola 

Sanctisalmo Domino IRoetro, Domino Xconi I, ponttficf 
fl&ajfmo, Ibenrfcue, Dei gratia res Bngliae ac Domtnua 
fjtbernta:, perpetuam 1 f elicftatem. 

Beatissime Pater: 

QUUM partim bellicis, partim aliis longe diversis 
studiis reipublicse causa adolescent! am nostram insue- 
verimus, miraturum te, Beatissime Pater, non dubita- 
mus, quod ejus nunc hominis partes nobis sumpserimus, 
qui omnem potius setatem consumpsisset in litteris, ut 
gravem scilicet hasresim pullulantem comprimamus. Sed 
desinet, opinor, Tua Sanctitudo mirari, postquam cau- 
sas expenderit, qua3 nos subegerunt ut hoc scribendi 
onus, quanquam non ignari quam sumus impares, su- 
bierimus. Vidimus siquidem in messem Domini jacta 
zizaniaB semina pullulare sectas, ha3reses in fide succres- 
cere, et tantam per orbem totum Christianum semina- 
tam discordise materiam, ut nemo, qui sincera mente 
Christianus sit, hsec tanta mala, tarn late serpentia, 
ferre diutius possit, quin et studium cogatur, et vires, 
qualescumque possit, opponere. 

Minim igitur videri non debet, si nos quoque, tametsi 
potestate non maximi, fide tamen ac voluntate nemini 
secundi in opus tarn pium, tarn utile, tarn necessarium, 
ut a nemine ferme possit absque piaculo prsetermitti, et 
nostram erga Tuam Sanctitatem observantiam, et erga 
religionem Christi studium, erga Dei cultum obsequium 
nostrum declarare constituiuius : maxime fidentes, etsi 
eruditio nostra sit tarn exigua, ut propemodum nulla, 
gratiam tamen Dei sic cooperaturam nobiscum, ut, 

182 The Epistle Dedicatory 

God: Greatly confiding, that although our Learning is 
not much, nay in Comparison, even Nothing; yet His 
Grace will so co-operate with Us, that what we are not 
able thereby to effect, He, by his Benignity and Power, 
may more fully perform, and by his Strength supply 
Our Weakness therein. Though we know very well, 
that there are every-where several more expert, espe 
cially in Holy Writ, who could have more commodiously 
undertaken this Great Work, and performed it much 
better than We : Yet are We not altogether so ignorant, 
as not to esteem it Our Duty, to employ, with all Our 
Might, Our Wit and Pen in the common Cause. For 
having, by long Experience, found, that Religion bears 
the greatest Sway in the Administration of Public Af 
fairs, and is likewise of no small Importance in the 
Commonwealth; We have employed no little Time, espe 
cially since We came to Years of Discretion, in the Con 
templation thereof; wherein We have always taken 
great Delight: And though not ignorant of Our small 
Progress therein made; yet, at least, it is so much, as, 
We hope, (especially with the Help, or rather Instiga 
tion of such Things as can instruct the most Ignorant, 
viz. Piety, and the Grief of seeing Religion abused,) 
will suffice for Reasons to discover the Subtilties of 
Luther s Heresy. We have therefore, (confiding in 
those Things,) entered upon this Work; dedicating to 
Your Holiness what We have meditated therein; that, 
under Your Protection, who are Christ s Vicar upon 
Earth, it may pass the public Censure. For we are per 
suaded that this Heresy, having for some Time exer 
cised its Rage amongst Christians; and being by Your 
most weighty and wholesome Sentence condemned, and, 
as it were, by Force plucked out of Men s Hands, if any 
Thing remains hidden in the Bowels of it, fed by Flat 
tery and fair Promises; it is to be rooted out by just 

Regis ad Summum Pontificem Epistola 183 

quod doctrina nequivimus perficere, id ipse pro sua 
benignitate summaque potentia plenius absolvat, 
ac nostram in litteris imbecillitatem suo vigore sup- 

Quanquam in litteris quoque, prsesertim sacris, etsi 
certo sciamus nusquam non esse multos, qui hoc scri- 
bendi munus et obire commodius, et praestare potuissent 
uberius, tamen non usque adeo rudes sumus, ut in com- 
muni causa dedeceat nos quoque, pro nostra virili, 
calamo quid possemus, quantulum id cumque fuerit, ex- 

Postquam enim in administranda republica maxi- 
mam semper vim, niaximumque momentum religionem 
habere multo usu advertimus, ut primum maturiores 
annos attigimus, cospimus ejus contemplationi non nihil 
studii impendere. Plurimum profecto, postquam coepi- 
mus, in eo delectati; consecuti tamen, non nos latet, 
quam exiguum, tantum tamen, ut speramus, quantum, 
adjuvantibus praasertim, vel potius instigantibus iis, 
quse vel admodum rudem abunde reddere instructum 
possent, pietate scilicet, et Isesse religionis dolore, ad 
Lutherana3 hseresis fraudes rationibus detegendas sit 

Itaque etiam hac fiducia rem tentavimus, et quae in 
ea meditati sumus, Sanctitati Tuse dedicavimus, ut sub 
Tuo nomine, qui Christi vicem in terris geris, publicum 
judicium subeant. Sic enim nobis persuasimus, quum 
ea bseresis aliquandiu inter Christianos grassata gravis- 
simaB saluberrimaique sententise tuaa vi e manibus 
hominum sit excussa, si quid ejus in pectoribus vel 
captione aliqua deceptis, vel blandis pollicitationibus 
inescatis, adhuc resedit, id esse justis rationibus ex- 
imendum. Sic enim futurum, ut quum duci quam 
trahi se ingenia libentius patiantur, non desit his 
mitioris quoque remedii ratio ; in qua promoverimus-ne 

184 TJie Epistle Dedicatory 

Reasons, and Arguments; that, as Men s Wits suffer 
themselves, more willingly to be led than drawn; so 
Reason also may supply these with the mildest Reme 
dies. Whether or no any Thing is effectually done in 
this, shall rest to Your Holiness s Judgment: If We 
have erred in any Thing, We offer it to be corrected as 
may please Your Holiness. 

Regis ad Summum Pontificem Epistola 185 

nos quicquam, an non, Beatitudinis Tuse judicium erit. 
Cujus etiam arbitrio, si quid est a nobis erratum, corri 
gendum oiferimus. 

Go tbe IReafcer 

ALTHOUGH I do not rank myself amongst the most 
Learned and Eloquent; yet (shunning the Stain of In 
gratitude, and moved by Fidelity and Piety;) I cannot 
but think myself obliged, (would to God my Ability to 
do it, were equal to my good Will!) to defend my 
Mother, the Spouse of Christ: Which, though it be a 
Subject more copiously handled by others ; nevertheless 
I account it as much my own Duty, as his who is the 
most learned, by my utmost Endeavours, to defend the 
Church, and to oppose myself to the poisonous Shafts of 
the Enemy that fights against her : Which this Juncture 
of Time, and the present State of Things, require at my 
Hand. For before, when none did assault, it was not 
necessary to resist; but now when the Enemy, (and the 
most wicked Enemy imaginable,) is risen up, who, by 
the Instigation of the Devil, under Pretext of Charity, 
and stimulated by Anger and Hatred, spews out the 
Poison of Vipers against the Church, and Catholic 
Faith; it is necessary that every Servant of Christ, of 
what Age, Sex, or Order soever, should rise against this 
common Enemy of the Christian Faith; that those, 
whose Power avails not, yet may testify their good Will 
by their cheerful Endeavours. 

It is now therefore convenient, that we arm ourselves 
with a two-fold Armour : the one Celestial, and the other 
Terrestrial. With a celestial Armour; That he, who, 
by a feigned and dissembled Charity, destroys others, 
and perishes himself, being gained by true Charity, 
may also gain others ; and that he who fights by a false 

Hfc lectores 

MOTUS quidem fidelitate ac pietate, quanquam mihi 
nee eloquentia sit, nee scientise copia, cogor tamen, ne 
ingratitudine maculer, matrem meam, Christ! sponsam, 
utinam tanta facilitate, quanta cum voluntate de- 
fendere. Quod licet alii prsestare possint uberius ac 
copiosius, mei tamen officii esse duxi, ut ipse quoque, 
quantumvis tenuiter eruditus, quibus rationibus possem, 
Ecclesiam tuerer, meque adversus venenata jacula 
hostis earn oppugnantis objicerem. 

Quod ut faciam, tempus ipsum, et prsesens rerum 
status efflagitat: nam antea quum nemo oppugnaret, 
nemini propugnare necesse erat. At quum jam hostis 
exortus sit, quo nullus potuit exoriri malignior, qui 
dsemonis instinctu charitatem prsetexens, ira atque odio 
stimulatus, et contra Ecclesiam, et contra catholicam 
fidem vipereum virus evomuit, necesse sst adversus 
hostem communem Christianae fidei omnis Christi 
servus, omnis setas, omnis sexus, omnis ordo consurgat : 
ut qui viribus non valent, omcium saltern alacri testen- 
tur aifectu. 

Nunc itaque convenit ut duplici armatura muniamur, 
coelesti scilicet ac terrestri. Coslesti, ut qui ficta 
charitate et alios perdit, et perit ipse, vera charitate 
lucrifactus, alios lucrifaciat, et qui falsa doctrina 
depugnat, doctrina vera vincatur. Terrestri vero, ut si 
tarn obstinatse malitise sit, ut consilia sancta spernat, et 
corruptionem piam contemnat, merito coerceatur sup- 
plicio : ut qui bene f acere non vult, desinat male f acere, 
et qui nocuit verbo malitise, supplicii prosit exemplo. 

188 To the Reader 

Doctrine, may be conquered by true Doctrine: With a 
terrestrial; that, if he be so obstinately malicious, as to 
neglect holy Councils, and despise God s Reproofs, he 
may be constrained by due Punishments; that he who 
will not do Good, may leave off doing Mischief;* and 
he that did Harm by the Word of Malice, may do Good 
by the Example, of his Punishments. What Plague so 
pernicious did ever invade the Flock of Christ? What 
Serpent so venemous has crept in, as he who writ of the 
Babylonian Captivity of the Church; who wrests Holy 
Scripture by his own Sense, against the Sacraments of 
Christ; abolishes the ecclesiastical Rites and Cere 
monies left by the Fathers; undervalues the holy and 
antient Interpreters of Scripture, unless they concur 
with his Sentiments ; calls the most Holy See of Rome, 
Babylon, and the Pope s Authority, Tyranny; esteems 
the most wholesome Decrees of the Universal Church 
to be Captivity; and turns the Name of the most Holy 
Bishop of Rome, to that of Antichrist ? O that detest 
able Trumpeter of Pride, Calumnies and Schisms! 
What an infernal Wolf is he, who seeks to disperse the 
Flock of Christ ?f What a great Member of the Devil 
is he,:): who endeavours to tear the Christian Members of 
Christ from their Head ? 

How infectious is his Soul, who revives these detest 
able Opinions and buried Schisms; adds new ones to 
the old, brings to Light (Cerberus-like, from Hell) the 
Heresies which ought to lie in eternal Darkness; and 
esteems himself worthy to govern all Things by his own 
Word, opposed against the Judgments of all the 
Antients; nay also to ruin the Church of God! Of 
whose Malice I know not what to say. For I think 
neither Tongue nor Pen can express the Greatness of it. 
Wherefore, before I exhort, pray, and beseech, through 
*Rom. xiii. 3, 4. fMatt. vii. 15. tJohn v iii. 44. 

Ad Lectores 189 

Quse pestis unquam tarn perniciosa invasit gregem 
Christi ? Quis serpens unquam tarn venenatus irrepsit, 
quam is, qui de Babylonica Captivitate Ecclesise 
scripsit, qui Scripturam sacram ex suo sensu contra 
Christi sacramenta detorquet, traditos ab antiquis 
Patribus ecclesiasticos ritus eludit, sanctissimos viros, 
vetustissimos sacrarum litterarum interpretes, nisi qua- 
tenus ipsius sensui conveniunt et consentiunt, nihili 
pendit, sacrosanctam sedem Romanam Babylonem ap- 
pellat, summum Pontificium vocat tyrannidem, totius 
Ecclesise decreta saluberrima captivitatem censet, sanc- 
tissimi Pontificis nomen in Antichristum convertit. O 
detestabilis arrogantise, contumelise, ac schismatis buc 
cinator ! Quantus inferorum lupus est iste, qui Christi 
gregem dispergere quserit ! Quantum diaboli mem- 
brum, qui Christianos Christi membra quserit a capite 
suo decerpere ! Quam putris hujus animus, quam 
execrabile propositum, qui et sepulta ressuscitat schis- 
mata, et vetustis adjicit nova, et haereses seternis abden- 
das tenebris velut Cerberum ex inferis producit in 
lucem, dignumque ducit se, cujus unius verbo, post- 
habitis antiquis omnibus, universa regatur, imo sub- 
vertatur Ecclesia! De cujus ego malitia quid dicam, 
nescio: quam tantam censeo, quantam neque lingua 
cujusquam, neque calamus exprimere possit. 

Quamobrem vos omnes Christi fideles hortor, oro, et 
per Christi nomen, quod professi sumus, obtestor, ut 
qui Lutheri opera (si modo is Babylonicse Captivitatis 
sit auctor) omnino velint inspicere, caute illud, et cum 
judicio faciant, ut, quemadmodum Virgilius aurum se 
colligere dixit e stercore Ennii, sic e mediis malis 
colligant bona. Nee ita, si quid arridet ipsis, affician- 
tur, ut cum melle simul imbibant venenum. Multo 
enim satius fuerit utroque carere, quam utrumque 

190 To the Reader 

the Name of Christ (which we will profess) all Chris 
tians, who are willing to look upon, and read Luther s 
Works, especially the Babylonian Captivity, (if he be 
Author of it) to do it warily, and very judicially ; that, 
as Virgil said, lie gathered Gold out of the Dross of 
Ennius; so they may also gather good Things out of 
Evil : And if any Thing please them, let them not be so 
taken with it, as to suck the Poison with the Honey; 
for it is better to want both, than to swallow both. To 
hinder which, I wish the Author may Repent, be con 
verted, and live;* and, in Imitation of St. Augustine, 
(whose Rule he professed) correct his Books, filled with 
Malice, and revoke his Errors. If Luther refuses this, 
it will shortly come to pass, if Christian Princes do 
their Duty, that these Errors, and himself, if he perse 
veres therein, may be burned in the Fire. In the mean 
while, we thought it fit to discover to the Readers some 
chief Heads or Chapters in the Babylonian Captivity, 
which have the most Venom in them, by which it will 
appear, very clearly, with what exulcerated Mind he 
began this Work ; pretending the public Good, but writ 
ing Nothing but malicious Inventions. 

We need not seek any foreign Testimonies for 
proving what we have said; for Luther (fearing that 
any one should go up and down in Search of such,) dis 
covers himself, and his Mind, of his own Accord, in his 
very Beginning. For who should doubt of what he 
aimed at, when he reads this one Sentence of his ? 
*Ezech. xxxiii. 11. 

Ad Lectores 191 

Quod ne accidat, utinam auctor aliquando resipiscat, 
ut convertatur, et vivat! ac suos libros omni malitia 
refertos, exemplo Augustini, cujus regulam profitetur, 
retractet, erroresque revocet ! Quod si recuset Lutherus, 
brevi certe fiet, si Christian! principes suum officium 
feoerint, ut errores ejus, eumque ipsum, si in errore 
perstiterit, ignis exurat. Interea nobis visum est in 
Captivitate Babylonica quasdam loca commons trare 
lectoribus, in quibus prsecipuum latet venenum. Ex 
quibus aperte satis constabit quam exulcerato animo 
agressus sit opus, qui, quum publicum bonum pra3- 
tendat, nihil prseter malitiam ad scribendum afferat. 

Ut ha3C doceamus, qua3 diximus, baud longe nobis 
petenda? probationes sunt : nam ne quis ob earn rem 
sursum deorsum cursitet, Lutherus ultro sese atque 
animum suum primo statim principio prodit. Quis 
enim dubitet quo tendat, quo se proripiat is, cujus vel 
hunc unum versum legerit ? 


f flnbulgences, anb tbe pope s Hutborit? 

Indulgeniice suni adulaiorum Romanorum nequitiw. 

As every living Creature is known chiefly by its Face, 
so by this first Proposition it evidently appears, how 
corrupt and rotten his Heart was, whose Mouth, being 
filled with Bitterness, broke out into such a Corruption ; 
for what he said of INDULGENCES in Times past, seemed 
to many, not only to detract much of the Roman 
Bishop s Power, but also to lessen the good Hope and 
holy Consolation of the Faithful, and mightily to excite 
Men to confide in the Riches of their own Penitence, 
and despise the Treasures of the Holy Church, and the 
Bounty of God : And yet what he then writ, was favour 
ably interpreted, because he only disputed many of 
them, but did not affirm them; desiring to be taught, 
and promising to obey him that would instruct him 
better. But what this new Saint, (who refers all 
Things to the Holy Spirit, which cannot brook any 
Thing of Falsehood,) did then write with a simple 
Intention, is easily discovered: For as soon as he had 
any Thing of wholesome Advice given him, he immedi 
ately vomited his Malediction against those, who en 
deavoured his Good, reviling them with Reproaches and 
Quarrels ; for which it is worth our While to see what 
Height of Folly he is come to at last. He confessed 
before that Indulgences were good, at least to absolve us, 
besides the Crime, from the Punishments also which 
should be enjoined us by the Order of the Church, or. 


Sunt adulatorum Romanorum nequitice. 

QUEMABMODUM animal omne potissimum ex facie 
dignoscitur, ita ex hac quoque prima propositione 
clarescit quam suppuratum ac putridum is habeat cor, 
cujus os, amaritudine plenum, tali exundat sanie. Nam 
quse de Indulgentiis olim disseruit, ea plserisque multum 
videbantur adimere non modo de potestate Pontificis, 
verum etiam de bona spe ac sancta consolatione fidelium, 
hominesque vehementer animare, ut in poenitentise suse 
confisi divitiis, Ecclesise thesaurum, et ultroneam Dei 
benignitatem contemnerent : et tamen ea, quae turn 
scripsit, omnia, idcirco mitius accepta sunt, quia plse- 
raque disserebat duntaxat, non asserebat, subinde etiam 
petens doceri, seseqne pollicens meliora docenti pari- 
turum. Verum istud quam simplice scripsit animo 
homo sanctulus, et omnia referens ad spiritum, qui 
fictum effugit, hinc facile deprenenditur, quod simul 
atque a quoquam salubriter est admonitus, ilicet pro 
benefacto regessit maledictum, conviciis et contumeliis 
insaniens : quibus operse pretium est videre, quo vesanise 
tandem provectus est. Ante fassus est Indulgentias 
hactenus saltern valere, ut prseter culpam etiam a poenis 
absolverent, quascumque videlicet vel Ecclesia statuerat, 
vel suus cuique sacerdos injunxerat. Xunc vero non 
eruditione, ut ipse inquit, sed malitia tantum profecit, 
ut sibi ipsi contrarius, Indulgentias in universum con- 
demnet, ac nihil aliud eas dicat esse, quam meras im- 

194 Of Indulgences, and the Pope s Authority 

by our particular Priest: But now it was not by Learn 
ing, (as he says himself,) but by mere Malice that he 
wrought; and, contradicting himself, he condemns In 
dulgences; and says, That they are nothing but mere 
Impostures, fit only to destroy People s Money, and 
God s Faith. Every Man may see how wickedly and 
furiously he rails in this Matter : For, if Indulgences, as 
he says, are but mere Impostures, and good for Nothing, 
then it follows, that not only our Chief Bishop, LEO X. 
(whose innocent, unspotted Life, and most holy Con 
versation are well known through the World, as Luther 
himself confesses in a Letter of his to the Pope) is an 
Impostor; but also all Roman Bishops in so many past 
Ages, are so, w r ho, as Luther himself says, did use to 
give Indulgences; some a Year s Remission; some three 
Years; some to forgive a Lent s Penance; some a certain 
Part of the whole Penance, as the Third, or one Half; 
at least Something., as to plenary, or full Remission of 
the Sin and Punishment. 

Then were they all Impostors, if Luther be true : But 
how much more Reason is there to believe, that this 
little Brother is a scabbed Sheep, than that so many 
Pastors were treacherous, and unfaithful ? For Luther, 
as is said above, shews what Kind of Man he is, and 
how uncharitable, when he blushes not, to lay such a 
Crime against so great, and so holy Bishops. If God 
(in Leviticus) says to all, Thou shalt not be an Accuser, 
or Backbiter amongst the People;* what may we think 
of Luther, who casts such a foul Scandal, not only on 
one Man, but on so many, and so venerable Prelates? 
And this he whispers, not only in one City, but pub 
lishes to the whole World. If he be accursed (as in 
Deuteronomy) who shall privately smite his Neigh 
bour;-^ with how great a Curse shall he be strucken, who 
*Levit. xix. 16. fDeut. xxvii. 24. 

I ndulg entice 195 

posturas, ad nihil omnino valere, prseterquam ad per- 
dendam hominum pecuniam, ac Dei fidem. 

Qua in re quam non scelerate modo, verum etiam 
f uriose bacchatur, nemo est qui non videt. Nam si nihil 
omnino valent Indulgentise, sed merge sunt, ut Lutherus 
ait, imposturse, tune necesse est impostores fuerint, non 
hie tantum Pontifex Leo decimus, cujus innocens et in- 
culpata vita moresque sanctissimi ab ineunte setate per 
orbem totum satis explorati sunt, quemadmodum in 
epistola quadam ad Pontificem Lutherus etiam ipse 
fatetur, verum etiam tot retro sseculis omnes Romani 
Pontifices, qui, quod Lutherus ipse commemorat, in- 
dulgere solebant, alius remissionem annuam, alius 
triennem, quidam aliquot condonare quadragesimas, 
nonnulli certam totius poenitentise partem, tertiam puta, 
vel dimidiam: aliqui demum remissionem indulserunt 
et poena?, et culpa9 plenariam. Omnes ergo, si vera dicit 
Lutherus, fuerunt impostores. 

At quanta magis cum ratione creditur hunc unum 
fraterculum morbidam esse ovem, quam tot olim Pon- 
tifices perfidos fuisse pastores ? Nam Lutherus, ut dixi, 
cujusmodi vir sit, quam nihil omnino charitatis habeat, 
evidentissime declarat, quum non vereatur tot summis, 
tot sanctis Pontificibus tantum crimen impingere. Si 
Deus in Levitico dicit omnibus : "Non eris criminator, 
nee susurro in populis" quid de Luthero censendum 
est? qui tarn immane crimen non in unum aliquem 
hominem, sed in tarn multos, tarn venerandos spargit 
antistites, idemque non in una quapiam urbe susurrat, 
sed per totum buccinat orbem? Si maledictus in 
Deuteronomio dicitur, qui clam percusserit proxi- 
mum, quanta maledictione percutitur, qui palam 
tantis opprobriis insultat in prsepositos ? Denique 
si "homicida est/ ut ait evangelista, ff nec vitam 
Jiabet ceternam, qui odit fratrem" annon hie aeterna 

196 Of Indulgences, and the Pope s Authority 

insults over his Governors with such Reproaches? 
Finally, J f, (as the Gospel says) lie be a Murtherer, and 
has not Life everlasting, who hates his Brother;* does 
not this Parricide deserve everlasting Death, who, with 
Hatred pursues his Father? Seeing he is come to that 
Pass, as to deny Indulgences to be profitable in this 
Life ; it would be in vain for me to dispute what great 
Benefits the Souls in Purgatory receive by them : More 
over, what would it avail us to discourse with him of the 
great Helps, whereby we are relieved from Purgatory 
itself ? Not able to endure to hear of the Pope s deliver 
ing any Person out of it, he presumes to leave none 
there himself. 

What Profit is there to dispute, or fight against him, 
who fights against himself? What should my Argu 
ments avail me, though I force him to confess what he 
before denied, since he now denies what before he con 
fessed? But admit the Pope s Indulgences were dis 
putable; yet it is necessary that the Words of Christ 
remain firm, by which he gave the Keys of the Church 
to St. Peter, when he said, Whatsoever thou shalt bind 
on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven; and whatsoever 
thou shalt loose on Earth, shall be loosed in Heaven:^ 
Likewise, Whose Sins ye forgive, shall be forgiven unto 
them, and whosoever Sins ye retain, shall be retained.^. 
By which Words, if it is manifest that any Priest has 
Power to absolve Men from Sins, and take away eternal 
Punishment due thereunto ; who will not judge it ridicu 
lous, that the Prince of all Priests should be denied the 
taking away of temporal Punishment ? 

But perhaps some may say, that Luther will not ad 
mit that any Priest has Power of binding, or loosing 
any Thing; or that the Chief Bishop has any greater 
Power than other Bishops or Priests: But what con- 
*I. John iii. 15. fMatt. xvi. 19. {John xx. 22. 

Indulgentice 197 

dignus morte parricida est, qui odio prosequitur 
patrem ? 

Qui quum eousque progreditur, ut neget Indulgentias 
quicquain valere in terris, frustra cum eo disputem 
quantum valeant in purgatorio. Prseterea quid pro- 
fuerit cum illo loqui quibus subsidiis liberemur a purga 
torio, qui totum f erme tollit purgatorium ? Unde quum 
pati non possit ut Pontifex quemquam eximat, ipse sibi 
tantum sumit, ut neminem ibi relinquat. Quid attinet 
cum eo pugnare, qui pugnat ipse secum? Quid argu- 
mentis promo v earn si cum eo agam, ut donet quod 
ante negavit, qui nunc id ipsum negat, quod ante dona- 
verat ? 

Verum, quantuinvis disputentur Indulgentise Pon- 
tificis, necesse est inconcussa maneant verba Christi, 
quibus Petro claves commisit Ecclesise, quum dixit: 
"Quidquid ligaveris super terrain., erit ligatum et in 
ccelo; et quidquid solveris super terram, erit solutum et 
in ccelo." Item: "Quorum remiseritis peccata, remit- 
tentur; et quorum retinueritis peccata, retinebuntur." 
Quibus verbis si satis constat sacerdotem quemlibet 
habere potestatem a mortalibus absolvendi criminibus, 
et seternitatem poenaB tollendi, cui non videatur absur- 
dum sacerdotum omnium principem nihil habere juris 
in poenam temporariam ? 

Verum aliquis f ortasse dicet : "Lutherus ista non ad- 
mittet, sacerdotem ullum quicquam ligare, vel solvere, 
aut Pontificem summum plus habere potestatis, quam 
alium quemvis episcopum, imo quam quemlibet sacer 
dotem." At quid id mea, quid admittat, aut quid non 
admittat is, qui quorum nihil admittat nunc, eorum 
plseraque paulo prius admisit, quique omnia nunc reji- 
cit solus, quse tota tot sseculis admisit Ecclesia ? ]STam, 
ut csetera taceam, quse novus iste Momus reprehendit, 
certe Indulgentias, si Pontifices peccavere, qui conces- 

198 Of Indulgences, and the Pope s Authority 

cerns it me, what that Man admits, or denies, who 
granted many Things a while ago, which now he denies, 
and who, alone, rejects all Things which the Holy 
Church has held during so many Ages ? For (to omit 
other Things which this new Momus, or feigned Deity 
censures) certainly if the Popes have erred, who granted 
Indulgences; the whole Congregation of the Faithful 
were not free from Sin, who received them for so long 
a Time, and with so great Content : In whose Judgment, 
and in the Custom observed by the Saints, I doubt not 
but we may rather acquiesce, than in Luther alone, who 
furiously condemns the whole Church, whose Chief 
Bishops, he not only loads with mad Reproaches, but 
also fears not to publish, that this Supremacy of the 
Pope is but a vain Name, and is effectually Nothing but 
the Kingdom of Babylon, and the Power of Nimrod, 
that strong Hunter; and desires his Readers, and the 
Book-binders, that (burning whatsoever he first writ of 
Papacy,) they may reserve this one Proposition, &c. 

Indulgentice 199 

serunt, immunis a peccato non erat tota congregatio 
fidelium, qui eas tamdiu tanto consensu susceperunt: 
quorum ego judicio, et observatae sanctorum consuetu- 
dini non dubito potius acquiescendum, quam Luthero 
soli, qui totam Ecclesiam tarn furiose condemnat. Qui 
non modo summum Pontificem conviciis insanis in- 
cessit, verum etiam proclamare non veretur: Ponti- 
ficium ipsum inane prorsus nomen esse, nee re quicquam 
aliud esse censendum, quam regnum Babylonis, et 
potentiam Nemrod robusii venatoris: eoque lectores 
orat, orat libraries, ut omnibus, quae prius de Pa- 
patu scripsit, exustis, hanc unam propositionem 


f tbe pope s authority 

Papatus est robusta Venatio Romani Pontificis. 

INDEED it is no ridiculous Desire in him, to wish the 
Things he writ before should be burned ; because many 
of them deserved it; yet much more this Proposition, 
which he desires may be preserved after the rest are 
burned, as if worthy of Eternity. What Man, if he had 
not known his Malice, but would have admired his In 
constancy in this Place ? For first, he denied the Pope s 
Supremacy to be of divine Right, or Law, but allowed 
it to be of human Right: But now, (contrary to him 
self) he affirms it to be of neither of them ; but that the 
Papacy, by mere Force has assumed, and usurped 
Tyranny. Formerly he was of Opinion, That Power 
was given to Roman Bishops over the Universal Church 
by human Consent, and for the public Good: And so 
much was he of that Opinion, that he detested the 
Schism of the Bohemians, who denied any Obedience to 
the See of Rome; saying, That they sinned damnably 
who did not obey the Pope: Having written these 
Things so little Time before, he now embraces what then 
he detested. The like Stability he has in this: That 
after he preached, in a Sermon to the People, That Ex 
communication is a Medicine, and to be suffered with 
Patience and Obedience; he himself, being (for every 
good Cause,) a while after excommunicated, was so im 
patient of that Sentence, that (mad with Kage) he 
breaks forth into insupportable Contumelies, Re- 



Est robusta venatio Romani Pontificis. 

LLLUD, hercle, non absurdum votum est, quod quse 
ante scripsit, flammis optat absumi. Erant enim 
pleraque flammis digna: sed multo tamen ipsa propo- 
sitio dignior, quam, exustis illis, jubet velut dignam 
seternitate substitui. 

Quanquam, quis non hie quoque, nisi qui malitiam 
norit, miretur inconstantiam ? Nam prius Papatum 
negaverat esse divini juris, sed humani juris esse con- 
cesserat. !N~unc vero, secum dissidens, neutrius juris 
esse confirmat, sed Pontificem sibi mera vi sumpsisse 
atque usurpasse tyrannidem. Sentiebat ergo pridem, 
humano saltern consensu, propter bonum publicum Ro 
mano Pontifici super Ecclesiam catholicam delatam esse 
potestatem. Idque usque adeo sentiebat, ut Boemorum 
quoque schisma detestaretur, quod se ab obedientia 
Eomanse Sedis abscinderent ; pronuncians eos peccare 
damnabi liter, quicumque Papse non obtemperarent. 
Ha3C quum baud ita pridem scripserit, nunc in idem 
quod turn detestabatur, incidit. 

Quin istud quoque similis est constantise : quod quum 
in concione quadam ad populum excommunicationem 
doceat esse medicinam, et obedienter patienterque 
ferendam, paulo post excommunicatus ipse, idque 
meritissimo jure, sententiam tamen tarn impotenter 
tulit, ut rabie quadam furibundus in contumelias, con- 
vicia, blasphemias, supra quam ullse possint aures ferre, 

202 Of the Pope s Authority 

proaches and Blasphemies: So that by his Fury, it 
plainly appears, that those who are driven from the 
Bosom of their Holy Mother the Church, are immedi 
ately seized, and possessed with Furies, and tormented 
by Devils. But I ask this ; he that saw these Things so 
short a while since, how is it that he becomes of Opinion, 
that then he saw Nothing at all ? What new Eyes has 
he got? Is his Sight more sharp, after he has joined 
Anger to his wonted Pride, and has added Hatred to 
both? Does he see farther with these so excellent 
Spectacles ? 

I will not wrong the Bishop of Rome so much, as 
troublesomely, or carefully to dispute his Right, as if 
it were a Matter doubtful ; it is sufficient for my present 
Task, that the Enemy is so much led by Fury, that he 
destroys his own Credit, and makes clearly appear, that 
by mere Malice he is so blinded, that he neither sees, 
nor knows what he says himself. Eor he cannot deny, 
but that all the Faithful honour and acknowledge the 
sacred Roman See for their Mother and Supreme, nor 
does Distance of Place or Dangers in the Way hinder 
Access thereunto. For if those who come hither from 
the Indies tell us Truth, the Indians themselves (sepa 
rated from us by such a vast Distance, both of Land and 
Sea,) do submit to the See of Rome. If the Bishop of 
Rome has got this large Power, neither by Command of 
God, nor the Will of Man, but by main Force ; I would 
fain know of Luther, when the Pope rushed into the 
Possession of so great Riches ? for so vast a Power, (es 
pecially if it begun in the Memory of Man,) cannot 
have an obscure Origin. But perhaps he will say, it is 
above one or two Ages since ; let him then point out the 
Time by Histories: Otherwise, if it be so antient that 
the Beginning of so great a Thing is quite forgot; let 
him know, that, by all Laws, we are forbidden to think 

Papatus 203 

proruperit sic, ut suo furore plane perspicuum fecerit 
eos qui pelluntur gremio matris Ecclesise statim Furiis 
corripi, atque agitari dsemonibus. 

Sed istud rogo: qui ilia tarn nuper vidit, unde nunc 
subito videt nihil se tune vidisse ? Quos novos oculos 
induit ? An acutiore cernit obtutu, postquam ad super- 
biam solitam ira quoque supervenit, et odium? Et 
longius videlicet prospicit, usus tarn prseclaris con- 
spiciliis ? 

Non tarn injurius ero Pontifici, ut anxie ac sollicite 
de ejus jure disceptem, tanquam res haberetur pro 
dubia. Satis est ad prsesens negotium, quod inimicus 
ejus ita furore provehitur, ut sibi fidem deroget ipse, ac 
dilucide se ostendat prse malitia neque constare secum, 
neque videre quid dicat. Nam negare non potest quin 
omnis Ecclesia fidelium sacrosanctam Sedem Romanam 
velut matrem primatemque recognoscat ac veneretur, 
qusecumque saltern neque locorum distantia, neque peri- 
culis inter jacentibus prohibetur accessu. Quanquam, 
si vera dicunt qui ex India quoque veniunt hue, Indi 
etiam ipsi, tot terraruin, tot marium, tot solitu- 
dinum plagis disjuncti, Komano tamen se Pontifici 

Ergo si tantam ac tarn late fusam potestatem, neque 
Dei jussu Pontifex, neque hominum voluntate con- 
secutus est, sed sua sibi vi vendicavit, dicat velim Lu- 
therus quando in tantas ditionis irrupit possessionem. 
Non potest obscurum initium esse tarn immensse poten- 
tise, prsesertim si intra memoriam hominum nata 
sit. Quod si rem dixerit unam fortassis aut duas 
setates superare, in memoriam nobis rem redigat ex 

Alioqui, si tarn vetusta sit, ut rei etiam tantse oblit- 
erata sit origo, legibus omnibus cautum esse cognoscit, 
ut cujus jus omnem hominum memoriam ita super- 

204 Of the Pope s Authority 

otherwise, than that Thing had a lawful Beginning, 
which so far surpasses the Memory of Man, that its 
Origin cannot be known. It is certain, that, by the 
unanimous Consent of all Nations, it is forbidden to 
change, or move the Things which have been for a long 
Time immoveable. Truly, if any will look upon antient 
Monuments, or read the Histories of former Times, he 
may easily find, that since the Conversion of the World, 
all Churches in the Christian World have been obedient 
to the See of Borne. We find, that, though the Empire 
was translated to the Grecians, yet did they still own, 
and obey the Supremacy of the Church, and See of 
Rome, except when they were in any turbulent Schism. 

St. Hierome excellently well demonstrates his good 
Esteem for the Roman See, when he openly declares, 
(though he was no Roman himself ,) that it was suffi 
cient for him, that the Pope of Rome did but approve his 
Faith, whoever else should disapprove it. 

When Luther so impudently asserts, (and that 
against his former Sentence,) That the Pope has no 
Kind of Right over the Catholic Church; no, not so 
much as human; but has by mere Force tyrannically 
usurped it; I cannot but admire, that he should expect 
his Readers should be so easily induced to believe his 
Words ; or so blockish, as to think that a Priest, without 
any Weapon, or Company to defend him, (as doubtless 
he was, before he enjoyed that which Luther says he 
usurped,) could ever expect or hope, without any Right 
or Title, to obtain so great a Command over so many 
Bishops, his Fellows, in so many different, and divers 
Nations. How could he expect, I say, that any Body 
would believe, (as I know not how he could desire they 
should,) that all Nations, Cities, nay Kingdoms and 
Provinces, should be so prodigal of their Rights and 
Liberties, as to acknowledge the Superiority of a strange 

Papatus 205 

greditur, ut sciri non possit cujusmodi habuerit initium, 
censeatur habuisse legitimum; vetitumque esse constat 
omnium consensu gentium, ne, quse diu manserunt im- 
mota, moveantur. 

Certe si quis rerum gestarum monumenta revolvat, 
inveniet jam olim, protinus post pacatum orbem, 
plerasque omnes Christiani orbis Ecclesias obtem- 
perasse Romanse. Quin Grseciam ipsam, quanquam ad 
ipsos commigrasset imperium, reperiemus tamen, quod 
ad Ecclesiae primatum pertinebat, prseterquam dum 
schismate laborabat, Ecclesise Romanse cessisse. Beatus 
vero Hieronymus quantum Romanse Sedi censeat defer- 
endum vel inde luculenter ostendit, quod quum Ro- 
manus ipse non esset, tamen aperte fatetur sibi satis 
esse, si suam fidem, quibusvis improbantibus aliis, com- 
probaret Papa Romanus. 

Cui quum Lutherus tarn impudenter pronunciet, 
idque contra suam pridem sententiam, nihil omnino 
juris in Ecclesiam catholicam, ne humano quidem jure, 
competere, sed Papam mera vi meram occupasse tyran- 
nidem, vehementer admiror quod aut tarn faciles, aut 
tarn stupidos speret esse lectores, ut sacerdotem credant 
inermem, solum, nullo septum satellitio, qualem fuisse 
eum necesse est, priusquam eo potiretur, quod eum Lu 
therus ait invasisse, vel in spem venire unquam 
potuisse, ut nullo jure fultus, nullo fretus titulo, in tot 
ubique pares episcopos, apud tarn diversas, tarn procul 
disjectas gentes, tantum obtineret imperium. Nedum 
ut credat quisquam populos omnes, urbes, regna, pro- 
vincias, suarum rerum, juris, libertatis fuisse tarn pro- 
digos, ut externo sacerdoti, cui nihil deberent, tantum 
in sese potestatis darent, quantum ipse vix esset ausus 

Sed quid refert quid in hac re Lutherus sentiat, qui 
prse ira atque invidia non sentit ipse quid sentiat, sed 

206 Of the Popes Authority 

Priest, to whom they should owe no Subjection ? But 
what signifies it to know the Opinion of Luther in this 
Case, when (through Anger and Malice,) he himself is 
ignorant of his own Opinion, or what he thinks ? But 
he manifestly discovers the Darkness of his Understand 
ing and Knowledge, and the Folly and Blindness of his 
Heart, abandoned to a reprobate Sense, in doing and 
saying Things so inconsistent. How true is that saying of 
the Apostle ? Though I have Prophecy, and understand 
all Mysteries, and all Knowledge; and though I have 
all Faith, so as to remove Mountains, and have not 
Charity, I am Nothing.* Of which Charity Luther not 
only shews how void he is, by perishing himself through 
Fury; but much more by endeavouring to draw all 
others with him into Destruction, whilst he strives to 
dissuade them from their Obedience to the Chief 
Bishop, whom, in a three-fold Manner, he himself is 
bound to obey, viz. as a Christian, as a Priest, and as a 
religious Brother; his Disobedience also deserving to be 
punished in a treble Manner: He remembers not how 
much Obedience is better than Sacrifice ;f not does he 
consider how it is ordained in Deuteronomy, That the 
Man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken 
unto the Priest, (that stands to minister there before 
the Lord thy God,) or unto the Judge, even that Man 
shall die:$ He considers not, I say, what cruel Punish 
ment he deserves, that will not obey the chief Priest 
and supreme Judge upon Earth. For this poor Brother, 
being cited to appear before the Pope, with Offers to pay 
his Expences, and Promise of safe Conduct ; he refuses 
to go without a Guard; troubling the whole Church as 
much as he could, and exciting the whole Body to rebel 
against the Head ; which to do, is as the Sin of Witch 
craft; and in whom to acquiesce, is as the Sin of Idol- 
*I. Cor. xiii. 2. f I. Kings xv. 22. JDeut. xvii. 12. 

Papatus 207 

bene declarat offuscatam scientiam suam, ei cor ipsius 
insipiens obscuratum, traditumque in reprobum sensum, 
ut faciat ac dicat ea quce non conveniunt. Quam verum 
est illud Apostoli : "8i habuero prophetiam, et noverim 
omnia mysteria, et omnem scientiam, et si habuero 
omnem fidem, ita ut monies transferam, charitatem 
autem non habuero, nihil sum!" A qua quam longe 
abest iste, non illud tantum ostendit, quod prae furore 
perit ipse, sed istud multo magis, quod universes secum 
trahere conatur in perditionem, dum omnes ab obedi- 
entia summi Pontificis laborat avertere : cui ipse triplici 
vinculo tenetur astrictus, utpote Christianus, sacerdos, 
et postremo fraterculus, tripliciter a Deo vicissim 

Neque meminit quicquam, quanto melior est obedi- 
entia quam victimce. Xeque considerat, si in Deuter- 
onomio cavetur ut qui superbierit, nolens obedire sacer- 
dotis imperio, qui pro tempore ministrat Domino Deo 
suo, et decreto judicis, moriatur, quam atroci sit sup- 
plicio dignus is, qui sacerdoti omnium summo, eidemque 
supremo in terris judici non paruerit. Nam et quum 
vocaretur ad Pontificem, oblatis expensis, et data fide, 
venire tamen fraterculus, nisi munitus prsesidio, con- 
tempsit; et jam, quoad potest, totam perturbat Eccle^ 
siam, corpusque totum sollicitat ad rebellandum capiti, 
cui quasi peccatum ariolandi est repugnare, et quasi 
scelus idolatries nolle acquiescere. 

Quamobrem quum Lutherus, odio provectus, se prse- 
cipitet in perniciem, et legi Dei recuset esse subjectus, 
suam nimirum quserens constituere, nos vicissim Chris- 

208 Of the Pope s Authority 

atry* Seeing therefore that Luther , (moved by Hatred) 
runs head-long on to Destruction, and refuses to submit 
to the Law of God, but desires to establish a Law of his 
own; it behoves all Christians to beware, lest (as the 
Apostle says) through the Disobedience of one, many be 
made Sinners ;\ but on the contrary, by hating and de 
testing his Wickedness, we may sing with the Prophet, 
I hated the wicked, and loved your Law.\ 

*I. Kings xv. 23. fRom. v. 19. {Ps. cxviii. 113. 

Papatus 209 

ticolae caveamus ne, quod Apostolus ait, "per inobedi- 
entiam unius hominis peccatores constituti simus 
multi;" sed illius iniquitatem perosi, Domino cum 
propheta canamus: "Iniquos odio habui, legem autem 
tuam dilexi." 

CHAP. Ill 

Gbe Defence of tbe Seven Sacraments 

BUT these two Chapters, (of abrogating Indulgences, 
and taking away all Authority of the chief Bishop,) of 
which we have already given our Opinion ; tho 7 they are 
wicked, yet are they but the Flourishings or first Essays 
of Luther, who now begins to murder and destroy the 
Sacraments, which in his Book he goes about to do ; all 
which whole Book, he confesses to be but a Flourish, to 
I know not what Work : I suppose it is some Work, in 
which he intends to fight more seriously against our 
most holy Faith, yet I much admire he should think to 
compose any Thing whatsoever, more stuffed with 
Venom, than is this whole Preface, or Flourish of his : 
In which of seven Sacraments, he leaves us but three, 
nor them neither, unless for a Time ; giving us to under 
stand, that he shall soon also take them from us ; for of 
the three, he takes away one immediately after in the 
same Book; whereby he plainly shews us what he in 
tends to do with the rest. 

To which Undertaking it seems he prepares the Way, 
when he says, That if he would speak according to 
Scripture, he would leave but one Sacrament and three 
Sacramental Signs. If any one do but diligently ex 
amine how he handles these three Sacraments, (which, 
for the present, he puts as three Sacraments, or under 
three Signs) he may perceive that he treats of them in 
such a Manner, as that none should doubt, but that when 
he sees his own Time, and at his own Pleasure, he in 
tends wholly to deprive us of them all. 

CAP. Ill 

5)e Sacramentte 

AT ista duo capita de tollendis prorsus Indulgentiis, 
et auferenda potestate summi Pontificis, de quibus quid 
nobis videtur exposuimus, quantumvis impia sint, Lu- 
theri tamen non nisi praeludia sunt ad Sacramenta peri- 
menda, quod toto agit libro. Quern librum totum f atetur 
prseludium, ad operis, opinor, quippiam, in quo decrevit 
serio moliri totius expugnationem fidei. Quanquam 
vehementer admiror, si quicquam edet unquam tarn 
serium, ut plus tumere veneno queat, quam totum hoc 
turget prseludium. In quo protinus, ex sacramentis sep- 
tem, tantum relinquit tria, nee ea tamen, nisi pro 
tempore, nimirum significans ilia etiam ipsa propediem 
sese sublaturum: nam e tribus unum aufert paulo post 
eodem libro, quo plane declaret quid proponet in 

Quam in rem viam etiam videtur prsestruere, quum 
ait se, si Scripturarum more loqui velit, non nisi unum 
sacramentum, et tria signa sacramentalia positurum. 
Quod si quis diligenter inspiciat quo pacto tractet hsec 
tria sacramenta, quse, seu tria, seu, tribus sub signis, 
unum ponit pro tempore, videbit ea sic ab illo tractata, 
ut nemini relinquat dubium id ilium in animo moliri, 
ut omnia tria possit suo rursus tempore prorsus amo- 

212 The Sacrament of the Altar 

Let the Reader diligently observe his Steps, and look 
to his own, that he may discover the Subtilties of this 
Serpent; and let him not, with too much Security, 
thrust himself amongst these Thorns, Brambles, and 
Dens, but warily walk round his Caverns, fearing lest he 
should secretly strike his mortal Sting into his Heel: 
This hideous Monster being caught, will become be 
numbed, and pine away by his own Venom. 


Sacrament of tbe altar 

LET us therefore begin where he began himself, with 
the adorable Sacrament of Christ s Body. The changing 
of the Name thereof, calling it, The Sacrament of 
Bread, shews that this Man cannot well endure, that we 
should be put in Mind of Christ s Body, by the Name of 
the Blessed Sacrament; and that, if under any fair Pre 
text, it were possible for him, he would give it a worse 
Name. How much differs the Judgment of St. Ambrose 
from this Man s, when he says, Though the Form of the 
Bread and Wine is seen upon the Altar, yet we must 
believe, that there is Nothing else but the Body and 
Blood of Christ: By which Words it clearly appears, 
that St. Ambrose confesses no other Substance to remain 
with the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament, 
when he says, That which is seen under the Form of 
Bread and Wine, is Nothing else but the Body and 
Blood of Christ. If St. Ambrose had only said Flesh 
and Blood, without adding any Thing more, perhaps 
Luther would have said, that the Bread and Wine were 
there also ; as Luther himself says, That the Substance 
of the Flesh is with the Bread, and the Substance of the 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 213 

Quas colubri istius astucias quo f acilius, lector, possis 
deprehendere, observa diligenter singula vestigia ejus, et 
suspende gressus tuos, neque nimium securus inter 
vepres ac tribulos, latebras et speluncas ejus obambula, 
ne, ex occulto insidiatus, calcaneo tuo exitiale virus in- 
stillet. Deprehensus enim torpebit ignavus, et suo ipse 
veneno tabescet. 


Be Sactamento 

INCIPIAMUS ergo, unde ipse incepit, a venerabili sac- 
ramento corporis Christi. Cujus primo quod nomen 
mutet, ac vocari velit sacramentum panis, indicat homi- 
nem non valde bene ferre, quod ipso sacramenti nomine 
admoneamur corporis Christi, et sicubi reperire colorem 
potuisset, quo nomen dare potuisset deterius, libenter 
fuisse daturum. Cujus ab animo perquam longe dissidet 
ac dissentit beatus Ambrosius, quum dicit : "Licet figura 
panis et vini in altari videatur, nihil tamen aliud, quam 
caro et sanguis Christi, credenda est." Ex quibus verbis 
evidentissime clarescit Ambrosium fateri nullam aliam 
substantiam cum Christi corpore manere permixtam, 
quum dicat nihil aliud esse quam corpus et sanguinem 
Christi id quod figura panis videtur, et vini. Si tantum 
dixisset Ambrosius: caro et sanguis, potuisset fortasse 
Lutherus dicere quod Ambrosius, fatendo esse carnem 
et sanguinem, non negaret tamen panem simul esse ac 
vinum; quemadmodum Lutherus ipse dicit carnis sub 
stantiam cum pane, et sanguinis una cum vino sub- 
sistere. Sed quum Ambrosius dicat nihil esse aliud, 
quam carnem et sanguinem, aperte contradicit Luthero, 

214 The Sacrament of the Altar 

Blood along with the Wine: But seeing St. Ambrose 
says, That there is Nothing else but the Flesh and 
Blood, it appears that he is manifestly against Luther, 
who affirms, That the Bread is with the Flesh, and the 
Wine with the Blood. 

And though this which Luther says, were as true 
as it is false, viz. That the Bread should remain 
mingled with the Body of Christ; yet was it not 
necessary for him to blot the Name of the Body of 
Christ out of the Sacrament, in which he confesses 
that the true Body of Christ is. For if the Sub 
stance of Bread should be with the Body of Christ, (as 
he contends,) yet there is no Reason that the inferior 
Substance should take away the Name from the more 
worthy: Because, though the Apostle, (conforming him 
self to the Understanding of the Auditors, then ignorant 
People,) called it Bread; yet now, after the Faith has 
been so long established, it was not fit or convenient to 
change this so adorable a Name, (which represents to 
the Hearers, the Thing in the Sacrament,) into such a 
Name as would have turned their Minds from the Body 
to the Bread; neither would Luther, without Doubt, 
have changed it, if he had not determined with himself 
to draw the People to worship the Bread, and leave out 
Christ s Body; from which he himself is divided; con 
cerning which, I shall presently speak more fully. 

Sacrament of tbe Bucbarist un&er ne fform onlg 
Bominfsterefc to tbe 

IN the mean while, let us truly examine how subtilely, 
under Pretence of favouring the Laity, he endeavours 
to stir them up to an Hatred against the Clergy: For 
when he resolved to render the Church s Faith sus 
picious, that its Authority should be of no Consequence 
against him; (and so, by opening that Gap, he might 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 215 

qui simul cum carne dicit esee panem, et simul cum 
sanguine vinum. 

Quanquam si id, quod Lutherus dicit, tarn verum 
esset quam falsum est, pane cum Christi carne simul 
manere permixtum, tamen ne sic quidem necesse fuit 
Luthero delere nomen corporis Christi ex sacramento in 
quo fatetur verum Christi corpus esse. Nam si panis 
etiam substantia simul cum Christi corpore adesset, 
quemadmodum iste contendit, non est tamen ratio cur 
inferior substantia nomen prajripiat digniori. Nam etsi 
rudibus adhuc populis, ad auditorum captum se de- 
mittens Apostolus panem vocavit, nunc tamen tamdiu 
stabilita fide, nomen tain venerabile, quod rem sacra- 
menti repraesentet audientibus, in id nomen, quod audi 
torum animos a corpore in panem averteret, non 
oportebat immutari. Nee immutasset haud dubie Lu 
therus, nisi secum statuisset populum paulatim a Christi 
corpore, a quo ipse jam prsecisus est, in panis vene- 
rationem traducere, qua de re paulo post dicemus 

De Sacramento JEucbartstfac sub Tuna 3antum Specie 

INTERIM vero libet excutere quam fraudulenter per 
speciem f avoris in laicos conetur eorum odium concitare 
in sacerdotes. Nam quum decrevisset Ecclesise fidem 
suspect am redder e, ne quid ponderis ejus haberet auc- 
toritas, atque ita facta via, prsecipua quseque Christiana? 
religionis evertere, ab ea re sumpsit initium, cui popu- 

216 The Sacrament of the Altar 

destroy the chief est Mysteries of Christianity,) he be 
gan with that Thing, which he foresaw would be praised 
and applauded by the People: For he touched the old 
Sore, by which Bohemia had been formerly blistered, 
viz. That the Laity ought to receive the Eucharist under 
both Kinds. When first he began to handle this Point, 
he only said, That the Pope would do well, to have it 
ordained by a general Council, that the Laity should re 
ceive the Sacrament under both Kinds; but that being 
by some disputed with him, and denied, he contented 
not himself to stop there, but grew to such a perverse 
Height, that he condemned the whole Clergy of Wicked 
ness, for not doing it without staying for any Council. 
For my Part, I do not dispute the first : And though to 
me, no Reason appear why the Church should not or 
dain, that the Sacrament should be administered to the 
Laity, under both Kinds ; yet doubt I not, but what was 
done in Times past, in omitting it, and also in hindering 
it to be so administered now, is very convenient. Nor 
can I believe the whole Clergy, (during so many Ages,) 
to have been so void of Sense, as to incur eternal Pun 
ishment for a Thing by which they could reap no tem 
poral Good. It further appears not to be a Thing of 
any such Danger; because God, not only bestowed 
Heaven upon those Men, who did this Thing themselves^ 
and writ that it ought to be done; but likewise would 
have them honoured on Earth, by those by whom he is 
adored himself: Amongst whom (to omit others,) was 
that most learned and holy Man Thomas Aquinas, whom 
I the more willingly name here ; because the Wickedness 
of Luther cannot endure the Sanctity of this Man, but 
reviles with his foul Lips, him whom all Christians 
honour. There are very many, though not canonized, who 
are contrary to Luther s Opinion in this ; and to whom, in 
Piety and Learning, Luther is in no wise comparable: 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 217 

lum sperabat alacriter applausurum. Tetigit enim 
vetus ulcus, quo pridem ulcerata est Boemia, quod laid 
sub utraque specie non recipiant Eucharistiam. Earn 
rem quum prius ita tractasset, ut duntaxat diceret recte 
f acturum Pontificem, si curaret communi concilio statu- 
endum ut sub utraque specie laici communicarent, post, 
ubi nescio quis illud ei negavit, non contentus in eo 
manere, quod dixerat, sic profecit in pejus, ut totum 
clerum condemnet impietatis, quod istud non faciant, 
non expectato concilio. 

Ego de primo non disputo. Cseterum, etiam si causas 
non viderem, cur non decernat Ecclesia ut utraque 
species ministretur laicis, tamen dubitare non possem 
quin sint idoneae quse et olim f ecerunt ut id omitteretur, 
et nunc quoque faciunt ne redintegretur. ^Tec plane 
assentior totum clerum per tot ssecula fuisse tarn stoli- 
dum, ut se obstrinxerit seterno supplicio propter earn 
rem, unde nihil reportaret commodi temporalis: imo 
vero, quam nihil sit talis periculi, vel hoc evidenter 
ostendit, quod eos qui non tantum istud fecerunt, verum 
etiam qui scripserunt esse faciendum, Deus non modo 
suscepit in ccelum, verum etiam voluit esse venerandos 
in terris, et ab hominibus honorari, a quibus honoratur 
ipse. Inter quos fuit (ut de aliis interim taceam) vir 
eruditissimus, et idem sanctissimus divus Thomas 
Aquinas, quern ideo libentius commemoro, quoniam ejus 
viri sanctitatem Lutheri ferre non potest impietas, sed 
quern omnes Christiani venerantur, pollutis labiis 
ubique blasphemat. Quanquam sunt permulti, qui, 
etiam si pro sanctis recepti non sunt, tamen, sive doc- 
trina, sive pietate spectentur, tales sunt, ut Lutherus eis 
comparari non possit, qui hac in re contrarium Luthero 

218 The Sacrament of the Altar 

Among whom are the Master of the Sentences, Nich 
olas de Lyra, and many others; to each of whom it 
behoves all Christians to give more Credit, than to 

But pray observe how Luther staggers, and contra 
dicts himself : In one Place, he says, That Christ, in his 
last Supper, not only said to all the Faithful, as per 
mitting, but as commanding, Drink ye all of this:* Yet 
afterwards, (fearing to offend the Laity, whom he flat 
ters, with a View to stir up their Hatred against the 
Priests,) he adds these Words, not that they, who use 
but one Kind do sin against Christ, seeing Christ did 
not command to use any Kind, but left it to every Man s 
Discretion, saying, As often as ye do this, do it in Re 
membrance of me : But, says he, they sin who forbid to 
give both Kinds to such as are willing to receive them: 
The Blame, says he, lies on the Clergy, and not on the 
Laity. You see how clearly he first holds it for a Con- 
mand, and then says, it is no Commandment, but a 
Thing left to every Man s Discretion. What need we 
contradict him, who so often contradicts himself ? 

And yet before, when he speaks of all, in general, he 
does not defend the Laity well, if any Body would urge 
the Matter: And he proves no Sin to be in the Priests, 
whom he accuses most bitterly : For, he says, the Sin con 
sists in the Priest s taking the Liberty of one Kind from 
the Laity: If any Body should ask him here, how he 
knows that Custom to have been practised against the 
People s Will ? I believe he cannot tell it. Why then 
does he condemn the whole Clergy, for having taken the 
Laity s Right from them by Force, seeing he cannot by 
any Testimony prove that this was forcibly done ? How 
much more reasonable should it be, to say, that the Con 
sent of the People did concur with this Custom for so 
*Matt. xx vi. 27. 

De Sacramento Eucliaristice 219 

sentiunt. Inter quos sunt Magister sententiarum, et 
jSTicolaus de Lira, et complures alii, quorum cuilibet 
magis expedit Christianos omnes, quam Luthero, 

At vide, quaeso, quam vacillat ac sibi repugnat Lu- 
therus. Uno loco dicit Christum in Ccena omnibus 
omnino fidelibus, non permittendo, sed prsecipiendo 
dixisse: "Bibite ex eo omnes/ Postea vero timens ne 
laicos, quibus in sacerdotum odium adulatur, offenderet, 
hsec verba subjungit: "Non quod peccent in Christum 
qui una specie utuntur, quum Christus non prseceperit 
ulla uti, sed arbitrio cujuslibet reliquerit, dicens : Quo- 
tiescunque hcec feceritis, in mei memoriam facietis; sed 
quod illi peccant, qui hoc arbitrio volentibus uti pro- 
hibent utramque dari, culpa non est in laicis, sed in 
sacerdotibus." Videtis aperte, quod primo dixit esse 
prseceptum, hie dicit non esse prseceptum, sed cujuslibet 
arbitrio relictum. Quid opus est ergo nos illi contra- 
dicere, qui sibi toties contradicit ipse ? 

Et tamen quum dixit omnia, laicos non satis def endit, 
si quis rem urgeret, et in sacerdotibus, quos tarn atro- 
citer accusat, nihil probat esse peccati. ISTam in eo dicit 
totum esse peccatum, quod sacerdotes alterius speciei 
laicis invitis adimerent libertatem. Hie igitur si quis 
eum percontetur qui sciat istum ritum inolevisse reni- 
tente populo, non potest, opinor, docere. Cur ergo 
totum condemnat clerum, quod laicis invitis ademerit 
suum jus, quum id invitis esse f actum nullo possit docu- 
mento probare ? Quanto f uit a;quius, si, nisi volentibus 
illis, recte nequivifc institui, pro nunciare, pro tot ssecu- 
lorum consuetudine, plebis intervenisse consensum? 
Ego certe, qui video quas res a plebe clerus obtinere non 
potest, ne tantum quidem, quin ferme sub ipso altari 

220 The Sacrament of the Altar 

many Ages, if it could not be justly established but with 
their Pleasure ? For my Part, when I see what Things 
the Clergy cannot obtain from the Laity, (not even an 
Exemption from burying their Dead almost under their 
Altars ) I cannot easily believe that they should suffer 
themselves to be injuriously, and by Force, deprived of 
any such great Part of their Rights ; but that rather this 
was instituted for some reasonable Causes, and with the 
Consent of the Laity. 

What I most admire, is, that Luther should be so 
angry and passionate, for having one Kind taken 
away from the Laity in the Communion; but is 
Nothing at all moved that Children should be de 
barred from both: For he cannot deny, but that 
Children, in the primitive Times, did receive the 
Communion: Which Custom, if it was justly omitted, 
(though Christ said, Drink ye all of this*) and that, 
without Doubt, for very good Reasons, (though no Body 
can now remember them) why should we not think that 
it was for good and just Reasons, unknown at this Time, 
the primitive Custom of the Laity s receiving the Sacra 
ment in both Kinds, (which perhaps continued not for 
any considerable Time,) was taken away? 

Moreover, if he examines the strict Form of the 
Evangelical Narration, and leaves Nothing in this Mat 
ter to the Church ; why does he not command the Sacra 
ment to be always received at Supper-time, or rather 
after it ? 

Finally, it should not be esteemed less inconvenient to 
do any Thing in the Manner of receiving this Sacra 
ment, which ought not to be done. If therefore the 
Custom of the whole Church does not well, in denying 
to the Laity the Communion under the Form of Wine, 
by what Reason durst Luther put Water into the Wine ? 
*Matt. xxvi. 27. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 221 

suorum condant cadavera, non facile credo populum 
fuisse passurum ut inviti per contumeliam, in tanta 
re, ab ulla juris sui parte pellerentur, sed causis 
aliquot idoneis, e laicorum quoque voluntate, consti- 

At istud miror, tarn vehementer indignari Lutherum 
laicis ademptam alteram, quum nihil eum permoveat, 
quod utraque species adimatur infantibus: nam illos 
olim communicasse nee ipse negare potest. Qui mos si 
recte fuit omissus, quanquam Christus dicat: "Bibite 
ex hoc omnes" nee quisquam dubitat quin causae fuerint 
magna3, etiam si nunc earum nemo meminisset, cur non 
etiam cogitemus bonis justisque rationibus, quantumvis 
nunc ignoratis, abolitam esse consuetudinem qua laici 
olim, nee id fortasse diu, sub utraque specie solebant 
recipere sacramentum ? 

Praeterea, si earn rem ad exactam evangelicse narra- 
tionis formam revocat, neque quicquam prorsus per- 
mittit Ecclesise, cur Eucharistiam non jubet semper in 
coena recipi, imo vero post coenam ? 

Denique non minus incommodi fuerit in hoc sacra- 
mento facere, si quid fecisse non debeas, quam si quid 
non facias, quod fecisse debueras. Ergo si totius Ec- 
clesiae consuetudo rectum non f acit ut in laicis omittatur 
species vini, qua ratione aquam in vinum audet Lu- 
therus infundere ? Neque enim tarn audacem puto, ut 
sine aqua consecret, quam tamen ut admisceret, neque 
exemplum habet ex Coena dominica, neque ex Apostoli 

222 The Sacrament of the Altar 

for I do not think that he is so bold as to consecrate 
without Water; yet has he no Example in our Lord s 
Supper, nor any certain one, of the Apostles Tradition, 
of mingling the Wine with Water: But he learned it 
only by the Custom of the Church; to which, if he 
thinks himself obliged to be obedient in this Part, why 
does he so arrogantly oppose it in the other ? 

Whatever Luther chatters concerning this Matter; 
for my Part I judge it more safe, to believe that the 
Laity do rightly communicate, though under one Kind ; 
than that the Clergy, for so many Ages, were damned, 
for omitting both, (as he disputes;) for he calls them 
all wicked, and so wicked, that they all were guilty of 
the Crime of Evangelical Treason, // (says he) we must 
name them that are Heretics and Schismatics ; it is not 
the Bohemians, or Grsecians, (for they endeavour to fol 
low the Gospel) but the Romans who are the Heretics 
and Schismatics, and, by their Fictions, presume against 
the evident Truth of Scripture. 

If Luther admits Nothing else, but the evident and 
plain Text of Scripture, why does he not (as I said) com 
mand the Eucharist to be received at Supper-time ? For 
the Scriptures mention that Christ did so. How much 
better should Luther believe, that this Institution of the 
Church, in giving the Communion to the Laity under 
one Kind, was done by the Authority of God, not by any 
human Invention, as it was by God s Authority insti 
tuted that it should be received when the People are 
fasting: For as St. Augustin says, It has pleased the 
Holy Ghost, that the Body of our Lord, which, by the 
Apostles, was received after other Meats, should, in the 
Church, be received fasting, before any other Meats? 
It is very probable, that the Holy Ghost, which governs 
the Church of Christ, as he has changed the Time of re 
ceiving the Sacrament, from Supper, to the Morning, 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 223 

traditione compertum, sed sola Ecclesise consuetudine 
didicit : cui si putat hac in parte parendum, cur earn in 
altera tarn arroganter oppugnat ? 

Qua de re, quicquid Lutherus obgannit, ego certe 
tutius opinor credere laicos recte sub altera tantum 
specie communicatos, quam per tot saecula totum clerum, 
quod iste disputat, hac una de causa fuisse damnatum. 
ISTam omnes appellat impios, et tales ut in crimen inci- 
derint Isesse majestatis evangelicse. "Quod si utri sint," 
inquit, a haeretici et schismatici nominandi, non Boemi, 
non Grseci, quia evangeliis nituntur, sed vos, Romani, 
estis hasretici et impii schismatici, qui solo vestro 
figmento prsesumitis contra evidentes Dei Scrip- 

Si Lutherus nihil admittit aliud quam evidentes Dei 
Scripturas, cur non jubet Eucharistiam, uti dixi, sumi 
a coenantibus ? ISFam sic f actum a Christo Scriptura 
commemorat. Quanto melius crederet Lutherus, non 
humano figmento, sed eodem auctore Deo factum in 
Ecclesia ne laici sub utraque specie reciperent Eucharis 
tiam, quo auctore factum est ut reciperetur a jejunis ? 
"Placuit enim," ut ait beatus Augustinus, "Spiritui 
sancto, ut corpus Domini, quod post alios cibos ab apos- 
tolis in Coana receptum est, ante alios cibos a jejunis 
reciperetur in Ecclesia." Videtur ergo verisimile quod 
Spiritus sanctus, qui Christi regit Ecclesiam, sicut 
Eucharistise sacramentum mutavit a coenantibus ad 
jejunos, ita laicos ab utraque specie deduxit in alteram. 

224 The Sacrament of the Altar 

fasting, has also changed the Laity s receiving under 
both, to the communicating under one Kind: For he 
that could change the one, why could he not also alter 
the other. 

Luther shews plainly in this Place, that his Inten 
tion is to flatter the Bohemians, whose Perfidious- 
ness he before detested : For none of those, whom he calls 
Papists, and Flatterers of the Pope, do so much flatter 
the Roman Prelates, as Luther flatters the very Scum of 
the Bohemian Commonalty ; and not without Reason in 
deed ; for he foresees that the Germans, (whom he for 
merly deceived under the Form of a simple Sheep,) 
would reject him, as soon as they should perceive him to 
be a devouring Wolf. And therefore he insinuates him 
self into the Esteem of the Bohemians, and makes him 
self Friends of the Mammon of Iniquity* (as much as 
he is able,) that when he is banished his own Country, 
he may pass into that of those, into whose Errors he has 
already entered. 

And that some remarkable Action may render him 
more commendable to them when he goes, he endeavours 
to extinguish all the Force and Authority of Ecclesiasti 
cal Customs, and so, in the Conclusion, to ruin all, if 
his Designs should take ; which God forbid ! 

He aims at greater Things than he can expect to ac 
complish ; and therefore pleads for the Laity, though his 
Thoughts are quite contrary to what he pretends; for 
though he sweetly offers them Bread in the one Hand, 
yet he holds a Scourge-^ for them in the other. In the 
first Place, he is altogether for the Laity s being admitted 
to receive under both Kinds : (And who would not think, 
that he thereby endeavours to increase their Devotion 
towards the Sacrament f ) But look a little further what 
he drives at : For at last he brings his Business so far, as 
*Lu. xvi. 9. fLu. xi. 11. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 225 

Nam qui alterum mutare potuit, cur non alterare 
potuerit et alterum ? 

Hoc loco plane se ostendit Lutherus, quid agitet in 
ammo, quum Boemos, quorum perfidiam pridem exe- 
crabatur, nunc tarn bland e vicissim demulceat. Neque 
enim quisquam eorum quos ille papistas appellat, et 
adulatores Pontificis, ita Komano blanditur antistiti, 
quomodo Lutherus etiam fseci Boemicae plebis adulatur. 
Nee id tamen ab re : videt enim brevi fore ut Germani, 
quibus pridem per speciem ovinae simplicitatis imposuit, 
agnitum tandem lupum sint ejecturi ; atque ideo Boemis 
ante se insinuat, ac sibi, quoad potest, amicos facit de 
mammona iniquitatis, ut in quorum immigravit errores, 
extorris aliquando sua, illorum immigrare sinatur in 
patriam. Ad quos ut ob facinus aliquod insigne veniat 
commendatior, conatur interim ecclesiastics consuetu- 
dinis omnem -vim atque auctoritatem extinguere ; post, 
si id (quod omen avertant Superi!) feliciter ei cesserit, 
concussurus omnia. 

Longius enim destinat, quam quo putatur tendere; 
atque ita causam agit laicorum, ut longe meditetur 
aliud, quam pra? se f ert : quibus quantumvis blande por- 
rigat altera maim panem, altera tamen gestat scor- 
pionem. Nam multis primum verbis agit ut laici per- 
mittantur utramque speciem sumere. Et quis nunc non 
credet hoc eum conari, ut laicorum cultum erga sacra- 
mentum adaugeat ? Verum paulisper observa quo 
tendat : nam tandem sic rem totam claudit, ut id quoque 
permitti postulet, ne laici communicare cogaiitur in 
Paschate, neve ullum eis sumendse Eucharistise tempus 
indicatur, sed liber quisque suo relinquatur arbitrio; 
imo vero, ut ne sa3pius in tota vita quisquam sumat, 
quam semel, idque non ante extremum vitee diem, qui et 

226 The Sacrament of the Altar 

to desire, that they may not be obliged to receive at 
Easter; and that no Time may be appointed them for 
receiving, but that every Man may be left to his own 
Discretion ; nay further, That none should receive more 
than once, in his whole Life, and that at the Day of his 
Death; which is uncertain, and at which many are not 
able to receive. So, he that pretended to stand for the 
communicating under both Kinds, recommends the quite 
Contrary, to wit, That it may be lawful for them never 
to receive under any Kind ; and he esteems it an excel 
lent Liberty, that the People may be altogether freed 
from receiving the Sacrament at all. 

Wherefore, though this Serpent seems to flatter you 
with an amiable Aspect ; yet that venomous Tail of his 
seeks to sting you : For he makes it plainly appear, that 
he is more concerned for the People s receiving under 
one Kind, than for their abstaining from both. And 
even as the old Serpent, being cast out of Heaven, en- 
vyed Man s Happiness in Paradise; so Luther, being 
fallen, by his own Sin, under the Penalty of Excom 
munication, (and thereby deprived of the wholesome 
and life-giving Communion under both Kinds,) en 
deavours to entrap all others in the same Snare; in 
Order, that, being freed from the Obligation of receiv 
ing under both Kinds, they may, by little and little, 
bring themselves under no Kind at all. And the further 
you advance in reading his Libel, the more you will 
discover this detestable Fetch of his. 

Bbout 3ran0ut>tantiation 

HE makes it a second Captivity, that any Man should 
be forbidden to believe, that the true Bread and true 
Wine remain after Consecration : So that in this, (con- 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 227 

incertus est, et quum ad eum ventum est, sumere 
plerique non sustinent. Ita, qui videbatur id agere, ut 
laici recipere sinerentur utrumque, id oblique procurat, 
ut impune liceat ne speciem unquam quisquam sumat 
ullam; et hanc praeclaram libertatem ducit, ut populus 
in toto a suscipiendo sacramento liberetur ! 

Quamobrem utcumque serpens amico blandiatur 
aspectu, certe venenata ista cauda spiculum quaBrit in- 
figere, facitque perspicuum hoc magis ilium torquere, 
quod populus alteram speciem recipiat, quam quod 
altera abstineat. ^"am quemadmodum serpens antiquus, 
ejectus e coelo, invidit homini Paradisum, ita Lutherus 
quoque, postquam sua culpa sic in excommunicationis 
incidit laqueum, ut utriusque speciei salubri com- 
munione privetur, reliquos omnes eodem laqueo cupit 
implicare, ut utriusque recipienda3 vinculo soluti, neu- 
tram paulatim assuescant recipere. Quod illius ex- 
secrandum propositum, quo magis in libello progrederis, 
eo magis magisque pellucet. 

De Granssubetantfatione 

secundam Captivitatem facit, quod quisquam 
vetetur credere verum panem verumque vinum restare 
post consecrationem. Qua in re contra quam totus jam 

228 The Sacrament of the Altar 

trary to the Belief of the whole Christian World, both 
now, and for so many Ages past,) he endeavours to per 
suade, that the Body and Blood of Christ are after such 
a Manner in the Eucharist, that the Substance of true 
Bread and true Wine remains still after Consecration. 
I suppose, afterwards, when it pleases him, he will deny 
the Substance of the Body and Blood to be there, when 
he has a Mind to change his Opinion, as he has three 
Times done already; and yet he feigns that he teaches 
those Things, as being moved with Pity towards the 
Captivity of the Israelites, in which they are kept Slaves 
to Babylon. Thus he calls the whole Church, Babylon, 
and the Faith of Christ, Slavery: And this merciful 
Man offers Liberty to all those, who will divide them 
selves from the Church, and become corrupted with the 
Infection of this rotten and separated Member : But it 
is worth our While to know by what Means he invites 
People to this more than servile Liberty. 

He esteems this to be his greatest and chiefest Reason, 
to wit, That Scripture is not to be forced, either by Men 
or Angels; but to be kept in the most simple Signifi 
cation that can be: And (says he) unless for some mani 
fest Circumstances requiring, it is not to be taken other 
wise than in its proper and grammatical Sense; lest 
Occasion should be given to the Adversaries to under 
value the whole Scriptures: But (says he) the Divine 
Words are forced, if that which Christ called Bread, be 
taken for the Accidents of Bread; and what he called 
Wine, for the Form of Wine : Therefore, by all Means, 
the true Bread and true Wine remain upon the Altar, 
lest Violence be done to Christ s Words, if the Species 
be taken for the Substance. For, (says he) seeing that 
the Evangelists so plainly write, that Christ took Bread, 
and blessed it; and, afterwards, in the Book of the 
Acts, and by Paul, it is called Bread, we ought to take 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 229 

credit Christianus orbis, ac multis retro sseculis credidit, 
persuadere conatur Lutherus in Eucharistia sic esse 
Christi corpus et sanguinem, ut tamen substantia veri 
panis verique vini remaneat; posthac, opinor, quum 
libebit, corporis aliquando substantiam sanguinisque 
negaturus, tanquam post in melius mutata sententia, 
quemadmodum ter ante jam fecit, nempe in Indul- 
gentiis, in potestate Pontificis, et communione laicorum. 
Interea se fingit ista docere, motum videlicet miseri- 
cordia captivitatis, qua populus Israeliticus serviat 
Babyloni. Ita totam Ecclesiam appellat Babylonem; 
Ecclesise fidem vocat servitutem, et homo misericors 
offert libertatem omnibus qui velint ab Ecclesia sepa- 
rari, et istius putridi et abscisi membri contagione 
corrumpi. At quibus modis invitat in hanc plus 
quam servilem libertatem, operse pretium est cognos- 

Magnam censet ac primariam rationem, quod verbis 
divinis non est ulla facienda vis neque per hominem, 
neque per angelum, u sed quantum fieri potest," inquit, 
a in simplicissima significatione servanda sunt, et, nisi 
manifesta circumstantia cogat extra grammaticam et 
propriam, accipienda non sunt, ne detur adversariis oc- 
casio universam Scripturam eludendi. At vis," inquit, 
"fit verbis divinis, si, quod Christus ipse vocat panem, 
boc nos dicamus intelligi panis accidentia, et, quod ille 
vinum vocat, hoc nos dicamus esse tantum vini speciem. 
Omnibus ergo modis verus panis, ac verum vinum restat 
in altari, ne verbis Christi fiat vis, si species sumatur 
pro substantia. jSTam quum evangelistse clare scribant," 
inquit, "Christum accepisse panem, ac benedixisse, et 
Actuum liber, et Paulus panem deinceps appellent, 
verum oportet intelligi panem verumque vinum, sicut 

230 The Sacrament of the Altar 

it for true Bread, and true Wine, as a true Chalice. 
For they do not say themselves, that the Chalice is 

This is Luther s great, and (as he says) his chief 
Reason; which I hope so to handle, as to give all Men 
to understand, of how little Consequence it is. For in 
the first Place, though the Evangelists had plainly said, 
what he says they did ; yet that does not prove any Thing 
clearly for him ; but on the Contrary, they say nothing 
in any Place that may seem to favour his Side. Do not 
they write (says he) that he took Bread, and blessed it? 
And what does that argue ? We confess he took Bread, 
and blessed it ; But that he gave Bread to his Disciples, 
after he had made it his Body, we flatly deny ; and the 
Evangelists do not say he did : That this may more evi 
dently appear, and that there may be less Room left for 
Wrangling ; let us hear the Evangelists themselves : 

St. Mathew s Words are these, While they were at Sup 
per, Jesus took Bread and blessed it, and brake it, and 
gave it to his Disciples, saying, take, and eat, this is my 
Body: And taking the Chalice, he gave Thanks, and 
gave it to them, saying, drink ye all of this; This is my 
Blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many, 
for the Remission of Sins.* But St. Mark s Words are 
these, And while they were eating, Jesus took Bread, 
and blessed and brake it, and gave to them, and said, 
take, eat, This is my Body : And when he had taken the 
Chalice, and given Thanks, he gave it to them; and 
they all drank of it : And he said unto them, This is my 
Blood of the new Testament which is shed for many.^ 
St. Luke has it after this Manner, And he took Bread, 
and gave Thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, 
saying, This is my Body which is given for you: This 
do in Remembrance of me; likewise also the Chalice, 
*Matt. xxvi. 26-29. fMk. xiv. 22-24. 

De Sacramento EucTiaristice 231 

verum calicem. Non enim calicem transsubstantiari 
etiam ipsi dicunt." 

Hsec est ergo magna, et, quemadmodum ait ipse, pri- 
maria Luther i ratio, quam ego me spero facturum ut 
omnes quam primum intelligant nihil magni habere 
momenti. Nam primum id, quod ait evangelistas dare 
dicere, quantumvis clare dicant, pro Luthero tamen 
nihil clare probat ; contra vero, quod pro illo probaret, 
hoc nusquam dicunt. "An non scribunt," inquit, "ac- 
cepisse panem, et benedixisse ?" Quid turn postea ? 
Accepisse panem et benedixisse etiam nos fatemur; 
panem vero dedisse discipulis, postquam inde suum cor 
pus confecerat, hoc et nos instanter negamus, et evan- 
gelistse non dicunt. 

Qua? res quo fiat apertior, et tergiversandi minus 
pateat locus, evangelistas ipsos audiamus. Matthseus 
ergo sic narrat: "Coenantibus autem eis, accepit Jesus 
panem, et benedixit, ac fregit, deditque discipulis, et 
ait: Accipite, et comedite, hoc est corpus meum. Et 
accipiens calicem, gratias egit, et dedit illis dicens: 
Bibite ex hoc omnes; hie est sanguis meus novi testa- 
menti, qui pro multis effundetur in remissionem pecca- 
torum" Marci vero verba sunt ista: "Et manducan- 
tibus illis, accepit Jesus panem, et benedicens fregit, et 
dedit eis, et ait: Samite, hoc est corpus meum. Et 
accept o calice, gratias agens dedit eis; et biberunt ex 
illo omnes, et ait illis: Hie est sanguis meus novi testa- 
menti, qui pro multis effundetur/ Lucas denique nar 
rat hoc pacto: f Et accepto pane gratias egit, ac fregit, 
et dedit eis, dicens: Hoc est corpus meum, quod pro 
vobis tradetur: hoc facite in meam commemorationem. 
Similiter et calicem, postquam ccenavit, dicens: Hie est 

232 The Sacrament of the Altar 

after Supper, saying, This Chalice is the New Testa 
ment of my Blood, which is shed for you.* 

In all these Words of the Evangelists, I see none, 
where, after the Consecration, the Sacrament is called 
Bread and Wine; but only Body and Blood. They say, 
That Christ took Bread in his Hands., which we all con 
fess ; but when the Apostles received it, it was not called 
Bread, but Body. Yet Luther endeavours to rest the 
Words of the Gospel, by his own Interpretation. Take, 
eat; this, that is, this Bread, (says he, which he had 
taken and broken,) is my Body. This is Luther s Inter 
pretation; not Christ s Words, nor the Sense of his 
Words. If he had given to his Disciples the Bread 
which he took, as he took it ; without converting it into 
Flesh, before he bad them (in giving it) take and eat; 
it had been rightly said, that he gave what he took in 
his Hands; for then he had given Nothing else: But 
seeing he turned the Bread into his Flesh, before he 
gave it the Apostles to eat; they now receive, not the 
Bread which he took, but his Body, into which he had 
turned the Bread; as if one who had taken Seed, should 
give to another the Flower sprung thereof: He would 
not give what he had taken, though the common Course 
of Nature had made the one of the other. So likewise, 
much less did Christ give the Apostles what he took in 
his Hand, when, by so great a Miracle, he turned the 
Bread which he took, into his own Body ; unless, per 
haps, some will say, because Aaron took a Rod in his 
Hand, and cast a Rod from him,f that the Substance of 
the Rod remained with the Serpent, and the Serpent s 
Substance with the Rod, when it was restored again: 
If the Rod could not remain with the Serpent, how 
much less can the Bread remain with the Flesh of 
Christ, that incomparable Substance ? 

*Lu. xxii. 19, 20. fEx vii. 12. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 233 

calix novum testamentum in sanguine meo f qui pro 
vobis fundetur." 

Ex omnibus his evangelistarum verbis nullum video 
locum, in quo post consecrationem sacramentum vocetur 
panis aut vinum, sed tantum corpus et sanguis. Dicunt 
in manus Christum sumpsisse panem, id quod etiamnunc 
f atemur omnes ; at quum reciperent apostoli, non panis 
nominatur, sed corpus. At Lutherus evangelistse verba 
in suam partem conatur interpretatione torquere: "Ac- 
cipite, manducate, hoc," id est, hie panis, inquit is, quern 
acceperat et fregerat, "est corpus meum" Sed hsec est 
interpretatio Lutheri, non verba Christi, neque verbo- 
rum sensus. Si panem quern accepit, quemadmodum 
accepit, sic tradidisset discipulis, nee ante convertisset 
in carnem, ac porrigendo dixisset: Accipite, et mandu 
cate, recte diceretur porrexisse quod in manus ac 
ceperat : nihil enim fuisset aliud, quod porrigeretur. At 
quum, priusquam daret Apostolis manducandum, 
panem convertit in carnem, non jam accipiunt panem, 
quern ille susceperat, sed corpus ejus, in quod panem 
converterat. Quemadmodum si quis, quum semen ac- 
cepisset, alii daret inde natum florem, non id dedisset, 
quod acceperat, quanquam naturae communis ordo alte- 
rum fecisset ex altero, ita multo minus porrexit apostolis 
id quod in manus acceperat Christus, quum panem sus- 
ceptum in suam ipse carnem tanto vertisset miraculo: 
nisi quis contendat, quoniam Aaron virgam sumpsit in 
manum, et virgam projecit e manu, ideo cum colubro 
quoque virgse restitisse substantiam, aut colubri denuo 
cum recepta virgula. Quod si cum colubro virga restare 
non potuit, quanto minus restare potest panis cum carne 
Christi tarn incomparabili substantia ? 

234 The Sacrament of the Altar 

As for what Luther argues, or rather trifles, to shew 
the Simplicity of his own Faith ; when of the Wine, 
Christ does not say, Hoc, est Sanguis meus, but, Hie, 
est Sanguis meus: I wonder why it should enter into 
any Man s Mind to write thus: For who sees not that 
this makes Nothing at all for him, nay, rather, does it 
not make against him? It had seemed more for his 
Purpose, if Christ had said, Hoc est Sanguis meus: For 
then he might have had some Colour at least, whereby 
he might have referred the Article of Demonstrating to 
the Wine. But now, though Wine is of the neuter Gen 
der; yet Christ did not say Hoc, but Hie est Sanguis 
meus. And though Bread is of the masculine Gender, 
yet, notwithstanding, he says, Hoc est Corpus meum, 
not Hie; that it may appear, by both Articles, that he 
did not mean to give either Bread or Wine, but his own 
Body and Blood. Is it not very ridiculous, that Luther 
should imagine this Pronoun Hoc, not to be by Christ s 
Intention referred to the Body, but only for the Con- 
veniency of the Greek and Latin Tongues; and there 
fore sends us back to the Hebrew? For the Hebrew, if 
it has not the neuter Gender, cannot so conveniently de 
clare to what Christ has referred this Article, as the 
Greek or Latin can do. 

For though in the Hebrew, the Article should be of 
the masculine Gender, that is, Hie est Corpus meum; 
nevertheless, the Matter would be left doubtful, because 
that Speech might seem forced by the Necessity of the 
Language, which has no neuter Gender. But because 
Bread and Body are of different Genders in the Latin; 
he that translated it from the Greek should have joined 
the Article with Panis, if he had not found that the 
Evangelical Demonstration was made of the Body. 
Moreover, when Luther confesseth that the same Differ 
ence of Gender is in the Greek, he might easily know 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 235 

Nam quod argutatur, imo nugatur Lutherus pro suse 
simplicitate fidei facere, quum de vino dicat Christus, 
non: Hoc est sanguis meus, sed Hie est sanguis meus, 
miror quid homini venerit in mentem, quum istud scri- 
beret. Quis enim non videt quam nihil ornnino facit 
pro eo ? Imo contra, videretur magis pro eo f ecisse si 
dixisset Christus : Hoc est sanguis meus; habuisset enim 
ansam saltern Lutherus, qua demonstrandi articulum 
referret ad vinum. Nunc vero quum vinum sit neutri 
generis, Christus ait, non: Hoc, sed Hie est san 
guis meus; et quum panis sit generis masculini, ait 
tamen: Hoc est corpus meum, non Hie, ut uterque 
ostendat articulus Christum neque panem propi- 
nare, neque vinum, sed suum ipsius corpus, et sangui- 

Nam quod videri vult Lutherus pronomen hoc ad 
corpus referri, non Christi proposito, sed occasione lin- 
guarum, nempe latinse et grsecse, ac proinde nos remittit 
ad hebraicam, annon ridiculum est? Nam hebrsea 
lingua si neutrum genus non habet, non potest tarn 
aperte declarare ad utrum Christus retulit articulum, 
quam latina, vel grseca. Nam in hebrsea lingua si arti 
culus f uisset masculus, tanquam diceret : Hie est corpus 
meum, tamen res relinqueretur ambigua, quia potuisset 
ea locutio videri coacta necessitate linguae non habentis 
neutrum. Sed quum apud Latinos panis et corpus sint 
diversi generis, is qui transtulit e grseca articulum con- 
junxisset cum pane, nisi apud evangelist am reperisset 
demonstrationem factam de corpore. Prseterea, quum 
Lutherus fateatur idem generis discrimen esse et 

236 The Sacrament of the Altar 

that when the Evangelists writ in Greek, they would 
have put in the Article relating to the Bread, if they 
had not known our Lord s Mind ; but they were willing 
to teach the Christians, by the Article relating to the 
Body, that, in the Communion, Christ did not give 
Bread to his Disciples, but his Body. 

Wherefore, when Luther, to serve his own Turn, in 
terprets the Words of Christ, take, and eat, this is my 
Body/ that is, this Bread he had taken ; not I, but Christ 
himself teacheth us to understand the Contrary, to wit, 
That what was given them, and seemed to be Bread, was 
not Bread, but his own Body; if the Evangelists have 
rightly delivered us the Words of Christ : For otherwise 
he should say, not Hoc, that it might be expounded for 
Hie,) but, more properly, Hie Panis est Corpus meum: 
By which Saying he might teach his Disciples, what 
Luther now teaches to the whole Church, to wit, That 
in the Eucharist the Body of Christ, and the Bread are 
together. But our Saviour spoke after that Manner, 
that he might plainly manifest, that only his Body is in 
the Sacrament, and no Bread. 

How magnificently Luther brings in this for his Argu 
ment, That Christ speaks of the Chalice, which no body 
holds to be transubstantiated P I admire the Man is not 
ashamed of so unmeasurable a Folly. When Christ 
says, This Chalice of the New Testament is my Blood, 
what does that make for Luther? For what else does it 
signify, but that what he gave his Disciples to drink, 
was his own Blood? Will Luther make appear, by those 
Words of Christ, that the Substance of Wine remains, 
because Christ speaks of Blood? Or that the Wine can- 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 237 

Grsecis, facile potuisset cognoscere evangelistas, qui 
scripserunt graece, articulum fuisse posituros, qui refer- 
retur ad panem, nisi quod conscii mentis dominicse, 
voluerunt admonere Christianos articulo corporis, 
Christum non panem communicasse discipulis, sed 

Quamobrem quod Lutherus interpretatur in suam 
partem verba Christi: "Accipite et manducate, hoc est 
corpus meum" id est, hie panis quem acceperat, non ego, 
sed ipse Christus, contra docet sua verba intelligi, nempe 
hoc, quod eis porrigebat, non esse quod ipsis videbatur 
panem, sed suum ipsius corpus (si recte Christi verba 
recensent evangelistae). Nam alioqui poterat dicere, 
non: Hoc, quod exponeretur id est Hie, sed aperte 
potius: Hie panis est corpus meum; quo sermone doce- 
rentur discipuli id quod nunc Lutherus docet Ecclesiam, 
nempe in Eucharistia pariter et Christi esse corpus, et 
panem. Nunc vero sic locutus est, ut ostenderet mani- 
feste corpus duntaxat, non panem. 

Item quod tarn magnifice transfert ad se Lutherus 
quod Christus etiam loquitur de calice, quem nemo dicat 
esse transsubstantiatum, miror hominem non pudere 
tarn intemperantis ineptise. Quum dicit Christus : "Hie 
calix novi testamenti in meo sanguine" quid facit pro 
Luthero? Quid enim significat aliud, quam id, quod 
discipulis propinabat in calice, suum esse sanguinem? 
An ex his Christi verbis ostendet nobis Lutherus manere 
vini substantiam, quia Christus loquitur de sanguine, 
aut vinum in sanguinem non posse mutari, quia adhuc 

238 The Sacrament of the Altar 

not be changed into Blood, because the Chalice is still 
there? I wish he had chosen to himself some other 
Matter in which he might have played and sported with 
less Danger. For when he so much excuses the Bohe 
mians and Greeks from Heresy; as to call all the Roman 
Catholics Heretics, he shews himself to be a worse 
Heretic than either of those; who not only deny the 
Faith which the whole Church believes, but also per 
suades People to believe worse than the Greeks or Bohe 
mians ever did. I have thus far disputed these Things, 
that I might make appear, that what he brags himself 
to make out, cannot be shewn by the Words of Christ, 
and the Evangelists; nay in them the quite contrary is 
very clear, to wit, that Bread is not in the Eucharist. 
Luther speaks of the Eucharist s being called Bread, 
in the Acts of the Apostles: I desire he would shew us 
the Place : For my Part, I find none that is not ambigu 
ous, and which seems not rather to speak of a common 
Banquet, than the Sacrament. Yet I confess the Apostle 
speaks more than once of Bread, following the Custom 
of Scripture (which sometimes calls a Thing, not by the 
Name of what it is, but of what it was before ; as when 
it says, the Rod of Aaron devoured the Rods of the 
Magicians ;* which then were not Eods, but Serpents) or 
else perhaps content to call it what in Species it ap 
peared to be; deeming it sufficient to feed the People 
with Mil.k,f who as yet were but inexpert in Faith; and 
at first to exact Nothing of them, but even to believe that 
the Body of Christ was, after any Manner whatsoever, 
in the Sacrament; but afterwards, by little and little, 
to feed them with more solid Meat, as they gathered 
more Strength in Christ. He might as well have also 
touched, in the Acts of the Apostles, at that Place where 
St. Peter, speaking to the people, and insinuating into 
*Ex vii. 12. fHeb. v. 12. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 239 

restat calix? Utinam prgeludium delegisset sibi Lu- 
therus ex alia materia, in qua minore periculo potuisset 
ludere. Islam quum Boemos et Grsecos sic excuset ab 
hseresi, ut hsereticos clamet omnes esse Romanes, multo 
magis ostendit se Lutherus hsereticum, qui non solum 
fidem abnegat, quam tota credit Ecclesia, sed etiam de- 
teriora credi suadet, quam aut crediderunt Grseci, aut 
unquam credidere Boemi. 

Hactenus ista disserui duntaxat, ut ostenderem ex 
ipsius Christi verbis et evangelistarum ostendi non posse 
quod iste se jactat ostendere, imo contra liquere per- 
spicue in Eucharistia panem non esse. 

Quod in Actis apostolorum ait Eucharistiam appel- 
lari panem, vellem protulisset locum: ego nullum 
reperio, qui non sit ambiguus, et potius videatur de com- 
muni convivio dicere, quam sacramento. Apostolus 
tamen, fateor, panem non semel appellat, vel Scripturse 
secutus in sermone morem, quae solet interdum vocare 
quippiam, non id quod est, sed quod ante fuerat, ut 
quum ait: "Virga Aaron devoravit virgas magorum" 
quaa tamen tune virgse non erant, sed serpentes ; vel con- 
tentus fortasse vocare quod specie prse se ferebat, quum 
satis haberet rudem adhuc in fide populum lacte pascere, 
nee primum aliud exigere, quam ut quocumque modo 
crederent in sacramento esse corpus Christi : postea 
paulatim solidiore cibo pasturus, postquam adolevissent 
in Domino. Idem potuit et in apostolorum Actis contin- 
gere, ubi nee beatus Petrus alloquens populum, et illis 
Christi fidem insinuans, ausus est adhuc aperte quic- 
quam de ejus divinitate dicere; ita abdita, et populis 
dubia mysteria non temere proferebant ! At Christus 
apostolos suos, quos tamdiu sua doctrina formaverat, 
ipso sacramenti instituendi principio docere non dubi- 

240 The Sacrament of the Altar 

them the Faith of Christ; yet durst not as yet say any 
Thing openly of his Divinity : So cautious were they then 
of exposing rashly the sacred Mysteries to the People. 
But Christ made no Difficulty to teach his Apostles, 
(whom he had for so long Time instructed in his own 
Doctrine,) the very first Time he instituted the blessed 
Sacrament, that the Substance of Bread and Wine re 
mained no longer in the Sacrament ; but that the Forms 
of both remaining, the Substance was changed into his 
Body and Blood : Which he so plainly taught, that it is 
a very strange Thing that any Body should ever after 
call in Question a Thing so clear in itself. 

For how could he have more properly said, that no 
Bread and Wine remain in the Sacrament, than when he 
said, This is my Body ? for he did not say, my Body is in 
this, or, with this which you see, is my Body ; as if it 
should consist in the Bread, or with the Bread ; but this 
(says he) is my Body, manifestly declaring, (to shut the 
Mouth of every yelping Fellow) what he then gave, to 
be his Body. And though he had called what he gave to 
the Apostles, by the Name of Bread, (which he did not) 
yet, when he should teach them that were present, that 
what he called Bread, was no other Thing but his Body, 
(into which, by his Will, the Bread was changed) none 
could doubt what Christ would have us understand by 
the Name of Bread. And that very Circumstance (for 
Luther admits Circumstances) evidently declares, that 
the Word Bread, when the Bread is turned into Flesh, 
signifies, (without any Violence to the Text,) the 
Species, not the Substance of Bread ; unless Luther will 
stick so closely to the Propriety of Words, as to believe, 
that Christ was wheaten, or barley Bread in Heaven; 
because he says of himself, I am the Bread which de 
scended from Heaven;* or that he was a Vine laden 
*John vi. 41. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 241 

tavit, panis vinique non amplius restare substantiam, 
sed manente utriusque specie, utrumque tamen, et 
panem, et virmm in corpus et sanguinem suum esse con- 
versum. Quod tarn aperte docuit, ut plane mirandum 
sit exortum quemque postea, qui rem tarn claram rursus 
vocaret in dubium. 

Quomodo enim potuisset apertius dicere nihil illic 
remanere panis, quam quum dixit: "Hoc est corpus 
meum?" Non enim dixit: In hoc est corpus meum, 
aut : Cum hoc, quod videtis, est corpus meum, tanquam 
in pane, aut simul cum pane consisteret, sed : "Hoc est/ 
inquit, "corpus meum" nimirum declarans manifeste, 
ut os cujusque gannientis obstrueret, hoc totum, quod 
porrigebat, ipsius corpus esse. Quod ita porrectum 
apostolis, etiamsi, quod non fecit, nomine panis appellas- 
set, tamen, quum simul admoneret audientes idipsum, 
quod vocaret panem, nihil aliud esse, quam suum 
corpus, in quod totus fuerat, ipso mutante, conversus, 
nemo potuisset dubitare quid Christus vellet panis ap- 
pellatione significare; eoque circumstantia ipsa (nam 
circumstantiam Lutherus admittit) declarat evidenter 
vocabulum panis, quum panis mutatur in carnem absque 
ulla violentia facta verbo divino, panis significare 
speciem, non substantiam: nisi Lutherus adeo inhsereat 
proprietati verborum, ut Christum credat in coelis 
quoque fuisse panem triticeum, aut hordeaceum, prop- 
terea quod ipse dicit de se : "Ego sum panis, qui de coelo 
descendi;" aut veris uvis onustam vitem, quia dixit 
ipse: "Ego sum vitis vera et Pater meus agricola est;" 

242 The Sacrament of the Altar 

with real Grapes, because he said, I am the true Vine, 
and my Father is the Husbandman;* or that the Elect 
shall be rewarded in Heaven with corporal Pleasures, 
because Christ said, I dispose unto you a Kingdom, as 
my Father has disposed unto me; that ye may eat and 
drink at my Table in my Kingdom.-^ 

Luther takes a deal of Pains to confute the Arguments 
of the Neoteries, by which they endeavoured to main 
tain and prove Transubstantiation, by philosophical 
Keasons, out of Aristotle s School ; in which he troubles 
himself more than is requisite : For the Church does not 
believe it, because they dispute it so to be ; but because 
She believed so from the Beginning, and that none 
should stagger about it, decreed that all should so be 
lieve. They therefore exercise their Wit with philo 
sophical Reasons, that they may be able to teach that no 
absurd Consequence can follow that Belief ; or that the 
Change of Bread into a new Substance, does not neces 
sarily leave, but take away the former. 

Luther says, This Doctrine of Transubstantiation, is 
risen in the Church within these three Hundred Years ; 
whereas before, for above twelve Hundred Years, from 
Christ s Birth, the Church had true Faith : Yet all this 
while was there not any Mention made of this pro 
digious (as he calls it) Word Transubstantiation/ If 
he strives thus only about the Word, I suppose none will 
trouble him to believe Transubstantiation; if he will 
but believe, that the Bread is changed into the Flesh, 
and the Wine into the Blood ; and that Nothing remains 
of the Bread and Wine but the Species ; which, in one 
Word, is the Meaning of those who put in the Word 
Transubstantiation. But after the Church decreed that 
to be true, (though this were the first Time it should 
be ordained) yet if the Antients did not believe the Con- 
*John xv. 1. fLu. xxii. 29, 30. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 243 

aut electos denique remunerandos in coelo voluptate cor- 
porea, propterea quod Christus ait : "Ego dispono vobis, 
sicut mihi disposuit Pater meus, regnum, ut edatis et 
bibatis super mensam meam in regno meo." 

Lutherus multus est in destruendis Neotericorum ar- 
gumentis, quibus defendere nituntur, et probare Trans 
substantiationem rationibus petitis ex Aristotelica 
scholar qua in re videtur plus laboris insumere quam 
res exigat. Neque enim ideo credit Ecclesia, quia sic 
illi disputant, sed quia sic Ecclesia jam inde ab initio 
credidit, et, ne quis vacillet, ita credendum esse decre- 
vit: ideo illi rationibus etiam philosophicis exercent in- 
genium, quibus utcumque docere possint, quod ex tali 
fide nihil sequatur absurdum, aut conversio panis in 
substantiam novam necessario tollat, ac non relinquat 

Nam quod Lutherus ait hanc fidem TranssubstanticT,- 
tionis jam intra trecentos annos proximos esse natam, 
quum prius a Christo plus annis mille ducentis Ecclesia 
recte crediderit, nee interim de Transsubstantiatione 
tarn portentoso, ut ait ille, vocabulo mentio unquam ulla 
sit facta, si de vocabulo tantum litiget, nemo erit, 
opinor, illi molestus, ut credat Transsubstantiationem, 
modo credat panem sic esse conversum in carnem, et 
vinum in sanguinem, ut nihil neque panis remaneat, 
neque vini, prseter speciem, quod ipsum uno verbo 
volunt quicumque ponunt Transsubstantiationem. At 
istud postquam Ecclesia verum esse decrevit, etiamsi 
nunc primum decerneret, tamen, si veteres non credidere 
contrarium, quanquam de ea re nunquam ante quisquam 
cogitasset, cur non obtemperaret Lutherus Ecclesise 
totius prsesenti decreto : persuasus id nunc tandem reve- 

244 The Sacrament of the Altar 

trary, although none should ever think of that Thing be 
fore ; why should not Luther be obedient to the present 
Decree of the whole Church, as persuaded that this is 
revealed now at length to the Church, which was hidden 
before ? For as the Spirit inspires where he is will 
ing ;* so likewise he inspires when he pleases. 

But this is no such Thing, as Luther feigns, when he 
says, this Doctrine of Transubstantiation is risen up 
within three hundred Years. Yet let it not vex him to 
allow us four hundred Years ; for I think it is so many 
since Hugo de Sancta Victore writ a Book of the Sacra 
ments, in which, though not the Word Transubstantia 
tion itself, yet the Sense of his Words you may find to 
be of the same Effect. Though this Sacrament (says 
he) is but one, yet three different Things are proposed 
in it ; to wit, the visible Form, the real Presence of the 
Body, and Virtue of spiritual Grace/ You see how he 
puts down the Accidents of Bread, not the Substance; 
and the true Substance of the Body, not the Form ; and 
more plainly a little further: For what we see is the 
Species of the Bread and Wine ; but what we believe to 
be under that Form, is the very Body of Christ which 
hung on the Cross, and the very Blood which flowed 
from his Side. He is yet clearer in another Place, 
where he says, by the Word of Sanctification, the true 
Substance of Bread and Wine is turned, or changed into 
the true Body and Blood of Christ, only the Form of 
Bread and Wine remaining, and the Substance passing 
into another Substance. By this, then, it appears, that 
this Doctrine of Transubstantiation is somewhat more 
antient than Luther pretends it to be. But, for the bet 
ter Confirmation of this, we will shew, that what he 
thinks to be risen within three hundred Years, was the 
Faith of the holy Fathers above a thousand Years ago : 
*Joim iii. 8. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 245 

latum Ecclesise, quod ante latuisset ? Spiritus enim, 
sicut ubi vult spirat, ita spirat et quando vult. 

Nunc vero non est istud tarn novum, quam fingit Lu- 
therus : qui quum hanc Transsubstantiationis fidem 
natam esse dicat ab annis hinc trecentis, ne gravetur, 
qua3so, concedere saltern quadringentos ; totidem enim 
opinor effluxisse post editum ab Hugone de Sancto- Vic- 
tore librum de sacramentis, in quo Transsubstantia 
tionis, etsi non verbum, rem certe, et sententiam re- 
perias. Ait enim hoc pacto : "Jam quum unum sit 
sacramentum, tria ibi discreta proponuntur, species 
videlicet visibilis, et veritas corporis, et virtus gratis 
spiritualist 7 Vides ut speciem ponat panis, non veri- 
tatem, veritatem corporis, non speciem. Et paulo post 
apertius: a Quod enim videmus, species est panis et 
vini ; quod autem sub specie ilia credimus, verum corpus 
Christi est, et verus sanguis Jesu Christi, quod pependit 
in cruce, et qui fluxit de later e." Item alio loco multo 
adhuc manifestius, quum ait: "Verbo sanctificationis 
vera panis, et vera vini substantia in verum corpus 
et sanguinem Christi convertitur, sola specie panis 
et vini remanente, et substantia in substantiam transe- 

Clarum est igitur hanc Transsubstantiationis fidem 
antiquiorem esse aliquanto, quam fingit Lutherus. At 
ut eum astringamus f ortius, ostendemus quod ille natum 
videri vult intra annos trecentos, fidem fuisse sanctissi- 
morum Patrum ab annis hinc plus mille. Constat enim 
ante annos plus mille sic credidisse fideles, ut f aterentur 
totam panis vinique substantiam in Christi corpus et 

246 The Sacrament of the Altar 

For it is certain, that the Faithful, for above a thou 
sand Years past, did believe the Substance of Bread and 
Wine to be truly changed into the Body and Blood of 
Jesus Christ: Which makes me wonder that Luther is 
not ashamed of himself, to say, that this Belief of 
Transubstantiation has not been in the Church above 
three hundred Years. Who knows not that Eusebius Emis- 
senus dyed above six hundred Years since ? who, as if 
dreading the Broaching of such false Opinions said, Let 
all Doubt or Ambiguity of Unfaithfulness be put away : 
For he that is the Author of the Gift, is also the Witness 
of the Truth ; now the invisible Priest converteth, by his 
secret Power, the visible Creatures into his own Body and 
Blood; saying, take and eat, this is my Body. 7 Does 
not this holy Man say, most plainly, that the Substance 
of the Bread and Wine is changed into the Substance of 
the Body and Blood ? What could be said more to the Pur 
pose, than this of St. Augustine? We honour, (says he) 
invisible Things, viz. the Flesh and Blood in the visible 
Form of the Bread and Wine : He does not say, in the 
Bread and Wine, but in the Form of the Bread and Wine. 
Luther denies that the Form of Bread is to be called 
Bread ; and does he think that St. Austin should call that 
the Form of Bread, which is the true Substance of Bread? 
Likewise St. Gregory Nissenus says, That before the 
Consecration, it is but Bread ; but when it is consecrated 
by Mystery, it is made, and called the Body of Christ: 
His saying that it is so, before the Consecration, gives us 
to understand, that it is not so after the Consecration. 
Theophilus also, expounding the Words, Hoc est, &c. 
This is my Body, &c. says, This, which now I give, and 
you receive. For the Bread is not a Figure only of the 
Body of Christ,, but is changed into the proper Body of 
the Flesh and Blood of Christ; 7 and a while after, If 
we did see, says he, the Flesh and Blood of Christ, we 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 247 

sanguinem veraciter esse conversam. Quo magis miror 
non pudere Lutherum, quum dicat hanc fidem Trans- 
substantiationis intra annos natam esse trecentos. Euse- 
bium Emissenum quis nescit ante annos plus sexcentos 
esse def unctum ? Qui quasi veritus olim fore, qui talia 
molirentur, tot annis jam prseteritis clamavit: "Rece- 
dat," inquit, "omne infidelitatis ambiguum, quoniam 
quidem qui auctor est muneris, ipse est etiam testis 
veritatis. Jam invisibilis sacerdos visibiles creaturas in 
substantiam corporis et sanguinis sui secreta potestate 
convertit, ita dicens: Accipite ,, et comedite, hoc est 
corpus meum; et repetita benedictione : Accipite et 
bibite, hie est sanguis meus." Nonne hie vir sanctis- 
simus aperte dicit panis ac vini substantias in substan- 
tias corporis et sanguinis esse conversas ? Quid beatus 
Augustinus, quum ait: "Nos autem in specie panis et 
vini, quam videmus, res invisibiles, id est carnem et 
sanguinem, honoramus ?" Quid potest apertius dici ? 
Non enim dicit in pane et vino, sed in specie panis et 
vini. Lutherus negat panem appellandum esse quod 
tantum sit species panis, et putat Augustinum fuisse 
vocaturum speciem panis id quod esset panis vera sub- 
stantia ! 

Gregorius item Nyssenus : "Panis," inquit, u est ante 
consecrationem, sed, ubi consecratur mysterio, fit et 
dicitur corpus Christi." Quod ait esse ante consecra 
tionem, hoc designat post consecrationem non esse. 
Quin Theophilus quoque declarans ha3C verba: hoc est 
corpus meum, a hoc," inquit, "quod nunc do, et quod 
nunc sumitis. Non autem panis figura tantum est cor 
poris Christi, sed in proprium Christi corpus trans- 
mutatur." Et paulo post ait : "Si carnem et sanguinem 
cerneremus, sumere non sustineremus : propter hoc 
Dominus, nostrse infirmitati condescendens, species 

248 The Sacrament of the Altar 

could not endure to eat them : Therefore our Lord con 
descending to our Weakness, preserves the Forms of the 
Bread and Wine ; but changeth the Bread and Wine into 
his own true Flesh and Blood. Luther is here, by this 
good and learned Man, twice beaten down : For first he 
teaches, that that Article, Hoc, is not to be understood 
as Luther interprets it; Hoc, that is, Hie Panis; but 
Hoc, that is, This which now I give, and ye take : Sec 
ondly, he plainly says, that the Form of the Bread and 
Wine remains, and that the Substance is changed into 
the Body and Blood. But what else do they mean, who 
use the Word Transubstantiation, than what Theophilus 
said, not within three hundred Years, for he was dead 
some hundred Years before the Word Transubstantiation 
was used? What need I mention St. Cyril, who not 
only affirms the same Thing, but almost in the same 
Words ? Tor God, (says he) condescending to our Frail 
ties, lest we should abhor Flesh and Blood on the holy 
Altars, infuseth the Force of Life into what is offered, by 
changing them into the Truth of his own proper Flesh. 
Moreover, that none should say that the antient Fathers 
believed the Body of Christ in such Manner, to be in the 
Eucharist, as that the Bread should still remain; not 
only those Things which I have related, do fully evince, 
(as plainly they do) but likewise what we have above 
related out of St. Ambrose, when he said, that although 
the Form of Bread and Wine is seen, nevertheless we 
are to believe that there is nothing else after the Con 
secration, but the Body and Blood of Christ/ 

You see how the Holy Father says, That it is not 
only the Body and Blood ; but that there is nothing be 
sides them, although the Bread and Wine seem to be 
there. And he that speaks this, has not said it within 
three hundred Years past, in which Luther feigns that 
this Belief of Transubstantiation is risen ; but he spoke 
it above a thousand Years ago: 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 249 

panis et vini conservat ; sed panem et vinum in verita- 
tem convertit carnis et sanguinis." Hie vir piissimus, 
idemque doctissimus bis premit Lutherum; nam pri- 
mum ilium articulum hoc docet, non quomodo Lutherus 
docet exponendum, hoc., id est hie panis, sed hoc, id est 
id quod nunc ego do, et quod vos sumitis; deinde dicit 
aperte panis et vini non nisi species esse conservatas, 
substantias ipsas in corpus et sanguinem esse conversas. 
At quid aliud volunt, qui ponunt Transsubstantia- 
tionem, quam quod hie ait Theophilus, non intra tre- 
centos hos annos proximos, quippe qui defunctus est 
aliquod annorum centenariis prius quam Transsubstan- 
tiationis vocabulum nasceretur? Quid beatum Cyril- 
lum commemorem? Qui non tantum dicit idem, sed 
f erme etiam eodem modo ? Ait enim : "Ne horreremus 
carnem et sanguinem apposita sacris altaribus, con- 
descendens, Deus, fragilitatibus nostris, infundis 
oblatis vim vitee, convertens ea in veritatem proprise 

Prseterea, ne quis dicat antiques Patres credidisse 
sic in Eucharistia corpus esse Christi, ut tamen rema- 
neat panis, non ista tantum obstant, quae diximus (quse 
tamen obstant apertissime), sed illud prseterea, quod 
supra diximus ex Ambrosio, quum ait: "Licet figura 
panis et vini videatur, nihil tamen aliud, quam caro 
Christi, et sanguis post consecrationem credendum est." 

Videtis ut beatissiinus Pater dicat non tantum corpus 
esse et sanguinem, sed etiam nihil esse prseterea, licet 
panis et vinum esse videatur. Et istud qui dicit, non 
intra trecentos annos proximos hoc dixit, intra quos 
hanc Transmutationis fidem exortam esse fingit Lu 
therus, sed dixit ante annos plus mille. 

250 The Sacrament of the Altar 

Neither can I believe that any of the antient 
Fathers would have approved that fine Comparison 
of Luther s, viz. of Iron joined with the Fire. For 
none ever said that Iron is so converted into Fire, 
that the Form only remains, the Substance of the 
Iron being changed into that of the Fire; which 
was the Opinion of all the Ancients concerning Bread 
and the Flesh of Christ; or if, perhaps, any one 
Person was of a contrary Sentiment, yet one Swallow 
makes no Summer: And that Man, who ever he was, is 
rather to be excused for not perfectly seeing through a 
Matter, at that Time not in Dispute, than to be imi 
tated, contrary to the Belief of all the rest of the whole 
Church, and of so many Ages, in a Thing which he, if 
a good Man, and now alive, without Doubt, would not 
argue against : For that Man that has so much Esteem 
for the Body of Christ, as he ought to have, will more 
easily consent that any other two Substances should re 
main together, than that any other Body remain, mixed 
with the adorable Body of Christ; seeing there is no 
Substance worthy to be mixed with that Substance which 
created all Substances. Moreover, I suppose that the 
primitive Fathers would as little approve that Compari 
son of Luther, by which he intends to prove, that the 
Bread remains with the Flesh, as God did remain with 
Man in the Person of Christ: For as the most learned 
and the most holy of the ancient Fathers confess, in 
divers Places, that the Bread is changed into Flesh ; so 
none of them were so wicked or ignorant, as to think 
that the Humanity was changed into the Divinity ; un 
less perhaps Luther will devise a new Person, that as 
God took on him the Nature of Man, so God and Man 
take the Nature of Bread, and Wine; which if he 
believes, he shall be accounted an Heretic, by all those 
who are not Heretics. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 251 

Nee ego certe veterum fere sanctorum Patrum quem- 
quam puto fuisse probaturum concinnam istam Lutheri 
similitudinem ferri cum igne conjunct! ; nam nemo un- 
quam dixit ferrum sic in ignem converti, ut tantum 
ferri species relinquatur, substantia ferri in ignis 
mutata substantiam, quod de pane et Christi carne 
veteres senserunt omnes. Aut si quis unus forte sensit 
aliter, tamen neque una hirundo f acit ver ; et ille, quis- 
quis fuerit, potius excusandus est, quod in re turn non 
satis excussa parum perviderit, quam contra cseterorum 
omnium, contra totius Ecclesise, contra tot setatum 
fidem sequendus, in quam ipse quoque, quisquis fuerit, 
modo bonus fuerit, si nunc viveret, dubio procul f uerat 
concessurus. Nam quisquis beatissimum Christi corpus 
sic, ut debet, existimat, facilius assentietur quascumque 
duas substantias simul manere conjunctas, quam ullum 
corpus aliud manere commixtum cum venerando corpore 
Christi. Neque enim ulla substantia digna est, quse 
cum ea misceatur substantia, quse substantias omnes 

Prseterea olim Patribus opinor multo adhuc minus 
fuisse placituram illam Lutheri collationem, qua sic 
vult panem simul restare cum carne, sicut restabat in 
una Christi persona Deus cum homine. Nam ut passim 
veterum quisque Patrum doctissimus atque sanctis- 
simus fatetur panem mutari in carnem, ita nemo tarn 
impius erat, aut inscius, ut humanitatem converti 
senserit in divinitatem: nisi forte novam nobis per- 
sonam fingat Lutherus, ut, quomodo Deus assumpsit 
hominem, ita Deus et homo assumant panem et vinum ; 
quod si credat, habebitur, opinor, hsereticus apud omnes 
qui non sunt haeretici. 

252 The Sacrament of the Altar 

Wherefore, (to conclude this Discourse of Transub- 
stantiation) it evidently appears by Christ s Words, and 
by the Judgment of the holy Fathers, that the Faith of 
the Church, at this present, is true, by which it is be 
lieved, that the Substance of Bread or Wine doth not 
remain in the Eucharist; whence it follows, that Lu 
ther s Opinion, in teaching the Contrary, is false and 
heretical : From which Persuasion, I admire what Profit 
he promises the People : Is it, as Luther says, That no 
Body should esteem himself an Heretic, if perhaps he 
should be of his Opinion V But he himself confesses, 
that there is no Harm in believing this, as the Catholic 
Church now believes; but on the Contrary, the whole 
Church takes him to be an Heretic, who is of Luther s 
Opinion: He, therefore, ought not to move any one 
whom he wishes well, to be of his Judgment, which is 
condemned by the whole Church ; but rather advise those 
he loves, to join themselves to those whom he himself 
witnesses to be in no Danger. That Opinion of Luther 
is therefore false, as it is against the public Faith, not 
only of this Time, but also of all Ages : Nor does he free 
from Captivity those who believe him; but, drawing 
them from the Liberty of Faith, that is, from a safe 
Hold, (as he himself confesses) he captivates them, 
leading them into a Precipice, into inaccessible, uncer 
tain, doubtful and dangerous Ways : And he that loves 
Danger, shall perish therein* 

/ifoaae is a <5oo& "UHorfc 
AFTER this Man, who is free from any Evil, has es 
caped these two Captivities, which he imagines to him 
self ; that he may not captivate his Mind to the Obedi 
ence of God, he overcomes (as he pretends) a third Cap 
tivity; and proposes a Liberty by which he may capti- 
*Ecclus. iii. 27. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 253 

Quamobrem, ut aliquando finem de Transsubstantia- 
tione faciam, ex ipsis Christi verbis et sanctorum viro- 
rum sententiis evidenter liquet hanc, quam nunc tenet 
Ecclesia, veram esse fidem, qua creditur panis aut vini 
substantiam in Eucharistia non manere ; ex qua et illud 
sequitur, hoc Lutheri dogma, quod contra docet, f alsum 
esse prorsus et hsereticum: quo ex dogmate miror quid 
fructus populo spondeat. An, quod ait ipse, ne quis 
propterea semet credat hsereticum, quod fors ita cum 
Luthero sentiat? At Lutherus ipse fatetur nihil esse 
periculi, si quis hac in re sentiat quod tota jam sentit 
Ecclesia. At contra tota Ecclesia censet hsereticum esse 
eum, qui sentiat cum Luthero. E"on debet ergo Lutherus 
animare quemquam, cui bene cupit, ut secum sentiat, 
cujus sententiam tota condemnat Ecclesia, sed debet his 
suadere, quos amat, ut accedant illis, quos ipse quoque 
indicat in nullo versari periculo. 

Falsa est ergo ista Lutheri via contra publicam fidem, 
non hujus modo temporis, sed etiam setatum omnium, 
nee liberat captivitate credentes ei, sed educens e liber- 
tate fidei, hoc est e loco tuto, quod Lutherus ipse fatetur, 
captivat in errorem, ducens in prsecipitium, et vias in- 
vias, incertas, dubias, eoque plenas periculi; et "qui 
amat periculum, perit in illo." 

/llMssa sit pus JBonum 
POSTQUAM duas illas, quas ipse sibi fingit, Captivi- 
tates homo in malum liber evasit ; ne mentem in Dei 
captivet obsequium, expugiiat, ut simulat, Captivitatem 
tertiam, et libertatem proponit, qua totam captivet Ec- 
clesiam, utpote cujus lucidissimam nubem dispergere, 
columnam ignis exstinguere, arcam violare foederis, 

254 The Sacrament of the Altar 

vate the whole Church. This, worse than sacrilegious 
Caitif, endeavours to scatter abroad the Church s most 
splendid Congregation : to extinguish its Pillar of Fire ; 
to violate the Ark of the Covenant ; and to destroy the 
Chief and only Sacrifice which reconciles us to God, 
and which is always offered for the Sins of the People : 
For, as much as in him lies, he robs the Mass of all the 
Benefits that flow from it to the People; denying it to 
be a good Work, or to bring to them any Kind of Profit. 
In which Thing I know not whether more to admire his 
Wickedness, or his foolish Hope; or rather his mad 
Pride ; who, seeing so many Obstructions before him, as 
he himself mentions, brings Nothing with him, whereby 
to remove the least ; but seems as if he would go about 
to pierce a Rock with a Reed. For he sees, and con 
fesses himself, that the Opinions of the holy Fathers 
are against him, as also the Canon of the Mass, with the 
Custom of the universal Church, confirmed by the Usage 
of so many Ages, and the Consent of so many People. 
What Defence then does he oppose against so innumer 
able, so powerful, and so invincible Armies ? His ac 
customed Force rages ; he strives to breed Discord, and 
move Seditions, to excite the Commonalty against the 
Nobility : And that he may the more easily stir them up 
to a Revolt ; he, by his foolish and weak Policy, falsely 
pretends that he has Christ for Captain of the whole 
Army in the Camp ; and that the Trumpet of the Gospel 
sounds only for him; which is the most ridiculous 
Stratagem that ever was invented. For what Man liv 
ing is so wicked or blockish, as to think that the Church, 
which is the mystical Body of Christ should be in such 
Manner delacerated, as that the Head should be severed 
from the rest of the Members, joined together amongst 
themselves; or that Christ, who never abandoned the 
Flesh which once he took, should have cast off the 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 255 

summum, atque unicum sacrificium Dei propitiatorium, 
quod assidue pro populi peccatis offertur, homo plus- 
quam sacrilegus conatur auferre. JSTam Missam omni 
fructu qui ex ea promanat in populum, pro sua virili 
despoliat, quum Missam negat bonum opus esse, aut 
populo quicquam prodesse. Qua in re nescio magisne 
impietatem hominis admirer, an stultissimam spem, vel 
potius insanam superbiam: qui quum tarn multas ipse 
commemoret sibi objectas obices, nihil affert secum, quo 
revellat ullam, sed perinde agit, ac si rupes foret arun- 
dine perfossurus. 

Videt enim et fatetur obstare sibi sanctorum Patrum 
sententias, Missse canonem, totam denique totius Ec- 
clesiae consuetudinem, tot sseculorum usu, tot popu- 
lorum consensu corroboratam. Quid ergo prsesidii ad- 
versus tot acies, tain validas, tarn invictas opponit? 
Usitata via grassatur, laborat seminare discordiam, et 
serere seditiones, plebem in patres excitare, et quo 
vulgus ad defectionem provocet stultissima solertia, et 
facillime coarguenda, mentitur totius exercitus ducem 
Christum in suis sese castris habere, et evangelii tubam 
pro se simulata canere. Quo stratagemate nullum un- 
quam fuit excogitatum stultius. IsTam quis usquam 
vivit, aut tam impius, aut tarn omnino stupidus, qui 
Ecclesiam, corpus Christi mysticum, sic laceratam cen- 
seat, ut ubi membrorum omnium compago sit, illinc 
caput putet esse divulsum? ut is qui carnem, quam 
sumpsit, nunquam deseruit, Ecclesiam, propter quam 
sumpsit carnem, deseruerit, et cum qua se promisit ad 
finem usque sseculi permansurum, ab ea prorsus tot jam 
sseculis abfuerit, atque ad Lutherum tandem, conjura- 
tissimum ejus hostem, transfugerit. 

256 The Sacrament of the Altar 

Church, for whose Sake he took that Flesh ; and that he 
should, for so many Ages, absent himself from her, with 
whom he promised to remain to the End of the World, 
and should now pass to Luther s Side, who is her pro 
fessed Enemy ? But pray let us see by what Enchant 
ment he makes it appear for Truth, that Christ is on his 
Side, as he brags. After many idle Circumstances, he 
goes about to define what the Mass is; afterward he 
separates the Ceremonies of the Mass, from the Mass 
itself; he examines the Lord s Supper, and ponders the 
Words which Christ used in the Institution of the Sacra 
ment of the Mass : And, having found in them the Word 
Testament, (as if a Thing very obscure,) he begins to 
triumph, as though he had conquered his Enemies : He 
beautifies with Words this his new found Mystery; (as 
he calls it) and with great Gravity, as if it was never 
heard of before, teaches us what a Testament is. He 
bawls aloud, that it is to be marked and taken notice 
of, that a Testament is the Promise of a dying Person, 
by which he bequeaths the Inheritance, and institutes 
Heirs: Therefore (says he) this Sacrament of the Mass, 
is no other Thing than the Testament of Christ; and the 
Testament is Nothing but the Promise of the eternal 
Heritage giving his Body and Blood to us Christians, 
whom he appointed for his Heirs, as a Sign for the 
ratifying his Promise: This he repeats over and over 
again ; he inculcates, and fixes it ; intending to make it 
his immoveable Foundation whereon to build Wood, 
Hay and Stubble;* For, in laying this Ground-work, 
That Mass is the Testament of Christ, he boasts, that he 
will destroy all the Wickedness that impious Men (as 
he says) have conveyed into the Sacrament ; and that he 
will clearly prove we ought to receive the Communion 
with Faith alone, without much regard to any Manner 
*J. Cor. iii. 12. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 257 

Verum videamus, obsecro, quid afferat prsestigii. quo 
f aciat verum videri, quod dicit, Christum pro se stare. 
Post longas ambages diffinit Missam; deinde separat a 
Missa Missse cserimonias, excutit Coenam dominicam, et 
verba Christi trutinat, quibus usus est, quum institueret 
Missse sacramentum. Ibi quum testamenti verbum, rem 
videlicet tarn abstrusam, reperisset, jam tanquam profli- 
gatis hostibus coepit ingeminare victoriam; verbis 
adornat inventum, ut jactat, suum, et tanquam mys- 
terium hactenus inauditum magno supercilio docet quid 
sit testamentum. Notandum esse clamat, ac memoria 
tenendum, testamentum esse morituri promissionem, 
qua nuncupat hsereditatem, et instituit hseredes. a Hoc 
igitur sacramentum," inquit, "Missse, nihil est aliud, 
quam testamentum Christi, testamentum vero, nihil 
aliud est, quam promissio hsereditatis seternse nobis 
Christianis, quos suos hseredes instituit, corpus et san- 
guinem suum, velut signum ratae promissionis, ad- 
jiciens. " 

Hoc igitur decies repetit, inculcat, infigit, utpote 
quod haberi vult immobile fundamentum, super 
quod sedificet ligna, f cerium, stipulam. Nam hoc f unda- 
mento jacto, quod Missa Christi sit testamentum, 
omnem sese jactat impietatem eversurum, quam impii, 
ut ait, homines invexerunt in hoc sacramentum, et se 
dilucide probaturum ad communionem recipiendam 
sola fide veniendum esse; de operibus cujusmodi sint, 
non admodum esse curandum; conscientia quanto 
magis erronea sit, ac peccatorum vel morsu, vel titil- 

258 The Sacrament of the Altar 

of Good-works whatsoever ; and by how much the more 
erroneous our Consciences are, and the more moved with 
the Sting or Titillation of our Sins, the more holy is our 
State for approaching the Communion: But the more 
clear, pure and free from the Stain of Sin our Con 
sciences are, in the worse Capacity are we to receive. 
Further (he says) that Mass is no Sacrifice; that it is 
only profitable to the Priest, not to the People ; that it 
is nothing available, either to the Dead, or to the Living ; 
that to sing Mass for Sins, for any Necessity, or for 
the Dead, is an impious Error ; that Fraternities, as also 
the annual Commemorations for the Dead, are vain and 
wicked Things; that our voluntary maintaining of 
Priests, Monks, Canons, Brothers, and whatsoever we 
call religious, is to be abolished. 7 These, therefore, with 
many other great good Things, he glories to have found 
out by this Discovery, of the blessed Sacrament being 
the Testament of Christ. And now he inveighs against 
the sententious Doctors, as he calls them: He exclaims 
against all such as preach to the People; Those for 
writing, These for preaching so much in the Defence of 
the blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist ; and neither of 
them saying any Thing of the Testament, but most im 
piously concealing that most incomparable Good from 
the People, which so long since might have been profit 
ably known. The Laity, (he says) neither alive, nor 
after Death, will ever receive any Benefit by the Mass : 
For the Ignorance of which Matter, he denounces all 
Priests and Monks at this Day in the World, with their 
Bishops and Superiors, to be Idolaters, and in a very 
dangerous Condition. 

I do not therefore discuss how true that Mystery of 
Luther is, from which he attributes so much Glory to 
himself, in applying so accurately his Definition of the 
Testament to the Sacrament; yet at the same Time, I 

De Sacramento Eucharist ice 259 

latione moveatur, tanto sancthis accedi; quanto 
serenior, purior, et errore purgatior, tanto sumi dete- 

Ad hsec Missam bonum opus non esse. Missam non 
esse sacrificium. Missa sacerdoti tantum, non autem 
populo prodesse. JSTihil prodesse defunctis, nihil cui- 
quam viventium. Impium esse errorem, si Missa cana- 
tur pro peccatis, si pro cujusquam necessitate, si pro 
mortuis. Inanem esse rein et impiam fraternitates, et 
annuas defunctorum memorias, abolendam esse talem 
omnem sacerdotum, monachorum, canonicorum, fra- 
trum, religiosorum denique, qnos vocamus, omnium ali- 
moniam. Hsec igitur tot et tarn immensa bona se 
reperisse gloriatur, in eo solo, quod hoc sacrosanctum 
sacramentum comperit esse Christi testamentum. 
Jamque in sententiarios protinus, quos vocat, doctores 
invehitur ; exclamat in omnes qui declamant apud popu- 
lum, quod quum illi tam multa scribant, hi tarn multa 
loquantur et prsedicent de Eucharistise sacramento, 
neutri tamen attingant quidquam de testamento, sed 
impie celent populum bonum illud incomparabile, quod 
tamen jam olim scisse profuisset, ex Missa nihil un- 
quam boni laicos, neque vivos, neque defunctos, esse 
consequuturos. Ob cujus rei ignorantiam, denunciat 
universes hodie sacerdotes et monachos cum episcopis, et 
omnibus suis majoribus idolatras esse, atque in statu 
periculosissimo versari. 

Igitur illud Lutheri mysterium, e quo tantas efflat 
glorias, quod definitionem testamenti tam accurate ad 
sacramentum applicat, quam verum sit, non excutio; 
sed interim certe video, cur hoc inventum, tanquam 

260 The Sacrament of the Altar 

do not see why he should brag so much of this new 
Invention of his. I do not know indeed who he hears 
preach, where he is ; but here, I am sure, we have heard 
Preachers, over and over again, not only treat of those 
Things, which Luther brings out for so new and exqui 
site, viz. That Christ is a Testator; that he made his 
Testament in the last Supper ; that he promised an In 
heritance, which he declared to be the Kingdom of 
Heaven; that he instituted the Faithful for his Heirs; 
that the Sacrament is a holy Sign, exhibited for a Seal ; 
not only these, and such like, but also the dumber of 
Witnesses, the Bill, and other Rites of Testaments, they 
unfolded to us out of the deepest Secrets of both Laws, 
and applied all of them exactly to the Sacrament. And 
this they did more consciously, and truly, than Luther: 
For they referred to the same Testament, not only what 
Christ did at his last Supper, but also what he suffered 
on the Cross; only in this differing from Luther, that 
they did not find out the admirable and hitherto un 
heard-of Benefits of the Mass, by which the Clergy 
should lose all the Fruits of it in this Life, and the 
Laity in the Life to come: For the People would not 
maintain the Clergy to say Mass, if they should be per 
suaded they could reap no spiritual Good thereby. 

But it is worth our While to see from what Tree 
Luther gathers this Fruit. After he has very often re 
peated, that the Sacrament of the Eucharist is the Sign 
of the Testament, and the Testament is nothing else but 
the Promise of Inheritance; he thinks that it conse 
quently follows, that the Mass cannot be a good Work, 
or a Sacrifice. To which, if any one consents, he must 
immediately admit that Catalogue of Plagues, by which 
he endeavours to confound the whole Face of the 
Church : But if you deny it, then can he do nothing with 
so monstrous a Design: For I am almost ashamed of 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 261 

novum, tarn magnifice jactet prosuo. Nescio quos illic 
concionantes audiat, hie certe, non seinel audivimus, 
earn similitudinem ad taedium usque tractantes frater- 
culos, ut qui non ea duntaxat afferrent, quse nunc pro 
novis et exquisitis affert Lutherus, Christum esse testa- 
torem, testamentum in Coena condidisse, hsereditatem 
promisisse, eamdem nuncupasse regnum crelorum, hse- 
redes instituisse fidelium ccetum, sacramentum hoc 
sacrum esse signum, quod sit adhibitum pro sigillo : non 
hsec, inquam ? tantum, sed et testium numerum, et syn- 
grapham, et alios testamentorum ritus, ex intimis utri- 
usque juris erutos penetralibus explicarent, atque ada- 
mussim omnia applicarent ad sacramentum. Hoc 
aliquando concinnius, ac verius quoque, quam Lutherus, 
quod ad idem testamentum referebant, non tantum, quse 
Christus fecit in Cosna, sed etiam quse passus est in 
cruce; hoc uno tantum impares Luthero, quod mira- 
biles, et hactenus inauditos Missse fructus non invene- 
runt, quibus et clerus prsesentis vitae f ructum omnem, et 
populus futura? perderet. ISTeque enim sacerdotibus 
quidquam laici ternporalis boni conferrent ob Missam, 
e qua persuaderentur nihil se spiritualis boni referre. 
Sed operse pretium est videre qua ex arbore tarn salubres 
fructus colligat Lutherus. 

Postquam ergo ssepius inculcavit Eucharistise sacra 
mentum signum esse testamenti, testamentum vero 
nihil esse aliud, quam promissionem haereditatis, inde 
continue censet consequi, ut Missa neque bonum opus 
esse possit, neque sacrificium: quod quisquis ei conces- 
serit, jam illi statim admittendus erit totus ille pestium 
catalogus, quo totam Ecclesise faciem confundit. At 
quisquis negaverit illi, jam tarn magno molimine nihil 
egerit. E"am argumenta, quibus docere prse se fert, 
pudet propemodum recensere, ita sunt in re tantse ma- 
jestatis nugacia prorsus ac frivola. Sic enim colligit 

262 The Sacrament of the Altar 

the Arguments, by which he pretends to teach these 
Things ; they are so trifling and frivolous, in a Matter 
of so great Majesty. Thus he concludes; (for I will 
give you his own Words) You have heard that Mass is 
nothing else but the divine Promise, or Testament of 
Christ,, commended by the Sacrament of his Body and 
Blood ; which, if it be true, you understand, that by any 
Means it cannot be a Work; nor is it to be used after 
any other Manner, than by Faith alone ; and Faith is not 
a Work, but the Mistress and Life of Works. 7 It is a 
strange Thing, that, after so much Pains-taking, he 
vents nothing but mere Wind : Which, though he would 
have us believe it to be of Strength to overturn Moun 
tains ; yet truly to me, it seems not of Force enough to 
shake a Reed. For if you withdraw the Coverings of 
his Words, with which (like an Ape in Purple) he 
decks this ridiculous Matter ; if you take away the Ex 
clamations, whereby he so often rails, and insults, as a 
Conqueror; (though not as yet entered the Battle 
against the Church;) or if he had clearly proved the 
Thing, you will find that nothing remains, but a naked, 
and miserable Piece of Sophistry. For what else has 
he said by all that Heap of Words, but that Mass is a 
Promise, and therefore no Work ? Wlio would but pity 
this Man, that is so blockish, as not to perceive his own 
Impertinency ; or, if he understands himself, who would 
but take it heinously from him, that thinks all Chris 
tians so dull, as not to discover or comprehend so mani 
fest Follies ? I shall not dispute with him about the 
Testament or Promise, or the whole Definition, or Ap 
plication thereof to the Sacrament. I will not trouble 
him so much; he may perhaps find others who will 
ruin the best Part of his Foundation, by saying, That 
the Testament is the Promise of the Evangelical Law, 
as the Old Testament was of the Law of Moses; and by 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 263 

(nam ipsius verba recitabo) : "Audisti Missam nihil 
aliud esse, quam promissionem divinam, seu testa- 
mentum Christi, sacramento corporis et sanguinis sui 
commendatum." Quod si verum est, intelligis earn non 
posse opus esse ullo modo, nee alio studio a quoquam 
tractari, quam sola fide: fides autem non est opus, sed 
magistra, et vita operum. Minim est, quanto nixu par- 
turiens, quam nihil peperit, nisi merum ventum, quern 
quum ipse tarn validum velit videri, ut montes posset 
evertere, mihi profecto videtur tarn languidus, ut agi- 
tare non possit arundinem. Nam si verborum tollas 
involucra, quibus rem absurdam, velut simiam purpura, 
vestit, si tollas exclamationes illas, quibus jam velut re 
delucide probata, toties in totam bacchatur Ecclesiam, 
et nondum collata manu, tanquam ferox victor insultat, 
nihil aliud restare videbis, quam nudum et miserum 
sophisma. Quid enim aliud dicit tanto verborum am- 
bitu, quam Missa est promissio ; ergo non potest esse 
opus ? Quern non misereat hominis, si tarn stupidus sit, 
ut ineptiam suam non sentiat ? Aut quis non indigne- 
tur, si sibi conscius, tarn stupidos tamen omnes sestimet 
Christianos, ut tarn manifestas insanias nequeant depre- 
hendere ? 

contendam cum eo de testamento et promissione, 
et tota ilia diffinitione, et applicatione testamenti ad 
sacramentum. Non ero tarn molestus ei, quam alios 
fortassis inveniet, si qui bonam ei partem istius funda- 
menti subruerint, qui et testamentum novum dicant 
promissionem esse legis evangelicse, quemadmodum 
vetus fuit mosaicse, et testamentum istud negent a Lu- 

264 The Sacrament of the Altar 

denying it to be rightly handled by Luther/ For neither 
was the Testator particularly to name what he should 
leave to the Heir, whom he had appointed over all in 
general; nor is the Remission of Sins, which Luther 
says, is bequeathed for an Inheritance, the same with 
the Kingdom of Heaven, but rather the Way to Heaven. 
If any one should urge and press Luther in these, and 
such-like Sayings, he might, perhaps, by fastening these 
Engines in any Part of his Structure, shake the whole 
Frame thereof ; but I shall leave that to such as shall be 
willing to do it : And because he desires his Foundation 
should remain unshaken, I shall not go about to move 
it; I will only shew, that the House he has built upon 
it, falls of itself. And to shew this more plainly, let us 
consider a little the Original of the Matter, and examine 
the Mass by its first Pattern. 

Christ, in his most holy Supper, in which he insti 
tuted this Sacrament, made of Bread and Wine, his 
own Body and Blood, and gave to his Disciples to be 
eaten and drunk: A few Hours afterwards, he offered 
the same Body and Blood on the Altar of the Cross, a 
Sacrifice to his Father for the Sins of the People ; which 
Sacrifice being finished, the Testament was consum 
mated. Being now near his Death, he did (as some 
dying Persons are wont to do) declare his Will concern 
ing what he desired should be done afterwards in Com 
memoration of him. Wherefore, instituting the Sacra 
ment, when he gave his Body and Blood to his Disci 
ples, he said, Do this in Commemoration of me. He who 
diligently examines this, will find Christ to be the eter 
nal Priest, who, in Place of all the Sacrifices which were 
offered by the temporary Priesthood of Moses s Law, 
(whereof many were but the Types and Figures of this 
holy Sacrifice) has instituted one Sacrifice, the greatest 
of all, the Plenitude of all, as the Sum of all others, 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 265 

thero satis scite tractari; neque enim testator! nuncu- 
pandum esse nominatim, quid relinquat hseredi, quern 
ex asse instituat, neque remissionem peccatorum, quam 
pro hsereditate nuncupatam Lutherus ait, idem esse 
quod regnum ccelorum, sed viam potius ad coelum. 
Quas res, atque alias item aliquot quisquis urgere volet, 
ac premere, posset fortassis fundamenti Lutheriani 
structuram machinis alicunde concutere. Verum istud 
eis permittam, qui volent. Ego istud ei fundamentum, 
quod immobile postulat esse, non movebo ; tantum osten- 
dam sedificium, quod superstruxit, facile per se corruere. 
Quod quo liquidius appareat, consideremus paulisper 
originem rei, Missamque ad primum ejus exemplar ex- 

Christus igitur in ilia Ccena sanctissima, qua sacra- 
mentum illud instituit, corpus suum et sanguinein ex 
pane et vino confecit, ac tradidit manducandum biben- 
dumque discipulis,tunc intra paucas horas idem corpus, 
eumdem sanguinem in ara crucis obtulit in sacrificium 
Patri pro peccatis populi : quo sacrificio peracto, testa- 
mentum consummatum est. In Coena jam morti prox- 
imus, quemadmodum solent morientes, testamento 
quodam testatus est mentem suam, quid se defuncto 
fieret in memoriam sui. 

Instituens igitur sacramentum, quum suum corpus 
ac sanguinem exhibuisset discipulis, ait illis: "Hoc 
facite in meam commemorationem." Hoc si quis ex- 
pendat diligenter, videbit Christum sacerdotem seter- 
num, loco sacrificiorum omnium, quse temporarium 
mosaicse legis sacerdotium offerebat (quorum etiam 
pleraque sacrosancti hujus sacrificii tjpum gerebant) 
unum sacrificium, omnium summum, omnium plenitu- 
dinem, et quamdam veluti summam instituisse, quod et 

266 The Sacrament of the Altar 

that it might be offered to God, and given for Food to 
the People : In which Thing, as Christ was the Priest, 
so his Disciples did for that Time represent the People, 
who themselves did not consecrate, but received, from 
the Hands of their Priest, the consecrated Sacrament. 
But God did shortly after elect and institute them 
Priests, that they might consecrate the same Sacrament, 
in Commemoration of him. 

And what else then is this, but that they should con 
secrate, and not only receive it themselves, but likewise 
give it to the People, and offer it to God? For, if 
Luther should argue that the Priest cannot offer, because 
Christ did not offer in his Supper, let him remember 
his own Words, That a Testament involves in it the 
Death of the Testator; therefore has no Force or Power, 
nor is in its full Perfection ; till the Testator be dead. 
Wherefore, not only those Things which Christ did first 
at his Supper, do belong to the Testament, but also his 
Oblation on the Cross: For on the Cross he consum 
mated the Sacrifice which he began in the Supper : And 
therefore the Commemoration of the whole Thing, to 
wit, of the Consecration in the Supper, and the Oblation 
on the Cross, is celebrated, and represented together in 
the Sacrament of the Mass ; so that it is, the Death that 
is more truly represented than the Supper. And there 
fore, the Apostle, when writing to the Corinthians, in 
these Words, As often as ye shall eat this Bread, and 
drink this Cup, adds, not the Supper of our Lord, but 
ye shall declare our Lord s Death* 

Let us now come to Luther s chief Reasons, by which 
he proves Mass to be neither good Work, nor Sacrifice. 
And though it were better first to treat of Sacrifice ; yet 
because he has first moved concerning Work, we will 
follow him. When therefore he thus argues, Mass is a 
*I. Cor. xi. 26. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 267 

offerretur Deo, et in cibum iaretur populo. Qua in re, 
ut Christus sacerdos erat, ita discipuli eatenus reprse- 
sentabant populum, qui non consecrabant ipsi, sed con- 
seeratum de manu sacerdotis sui sumebant ; sed eos sta- 
tim Deus in sacerdotes elegit, atque instituit, ut ipsi 
idem sacramentum facerent in commemorationem ejus. 

Quod quid aliud est, quam ut consecrarent, nee sibi 
tantum sumerent, sed et exhiberent populo, et offerrent 
Deo ? Nam si ibi nobis instet Lutherus, sacerdotem 
offerre non posse, quia Christus in Coena non obtulit, 
recordetur eorum qua? dixit ipse, testamentum involvere 
mortem testatoris, nee ante vires et robur sumere, et 
tota perfectione compleri, quam eo moriente, qui testa- 
tus est. Quamobrem non ea solum pertinent ad testa 
mentum, quse prius fecit in Cosna, sed etiam oblatio ejus 
in cruce; nam in cruce consummavit sacrificium, quod 
inchoavit in Ccena, eoque totius rei commemoratio, 
nempe consecrationis in Coena, et oblationis in cruce, 
uno celebratur ac repraesentatur sacramento missse; 
atque adeo verius mors repraesentatur, quam Coena. 
Apostolus enim quum Corinthiis scriberet: "Quoties- 
cumque panem hunc comederitis, et calicem biberitis" 
adjecit, non Coenam Domini, sed ft mortem Domini an- 

Veniamus ergo nunc ad prasclaras istas Lutheri 
rationes, quibus probat Missam neque bonum opus esse, 
neque sacrincium; et quanquam praestaret prius trac- 
tare de sacrificio, tamen quoniam ille primam quaes- 
tionem fecit de opere, sequemur ilium. Quum igitur 
ita colligit: "Missa est promissio, ergo non est bonum 

268 The Sacrament of the Altar 

Promise, therefore no good Work, because no Promise 
is a Work; we answer, that the Mass, which the Priest 
celebrates, cannot more properly be called a Promise, 
than the Consecration of Christ was : And all under one 
we will demand of him, if Christ did not do a Work, 
when he consecrated ? which if he deny, we shall cer 
tainly begin to admire that there should be some Work 
done by him who cuts an Image out of Wood, and not 
by Christ, when he made his own Flesh of Bread ! And 
if Christ did any Work, I am certain none will doubt 
of its being a good Work: For if the Woman, who 
poured the Ointment upon his Head,* wrought a good 
Work in that, who doubts of his performing a good 
Work, when he gave his Body for our Nourishment, 
and offered it in Sacrifice to God? If this cannot be 
denyed, unless by him who intends to trifle in so serious 
a Matter, neither can it also be denyed that the Priest 
worketh a good Work in the Mass; seeing that in the 
Mass he does nothing else but what Christ did in his last 
Supper, and on the Cross; for this is declared in 
Christ s own Words, Do this in Commemoration of me. 
By which Words, what was he willing they should rep 
resent, and do in the Mass, but what he had done him 
self in his last Supper, and on the Cross ? For he in 
stituted, and began the Sacrament at his last Supper, 
which he perfected on the Cross. And from this Reason 
especially it seems, was taken the Occasion of mingling 
W ater with the Wine, according to the Custom of the 
Church; because Water and Blood did flow from the 
Side of Christ, dying on the Cross. 

Since it cannot be denyed that Christ wrought a 
good Work in his last Supper, and on the Cross ; neither 
can it be denyed, that the Priest represents, and per 
forms the same Things in the Mass: How can it then 
*Matt. xxvi. 7-10. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 269 

opus, quia nulla promissio est opus," dicemus Missam, 
quam sacerdos celebrat, non verius esse promissionem, 
quam fuit consecratio Christ! ; et simul quseremus ab eo, 
an non aliquod opus turn f ecerit Christus : quod si neget, 
mirabimur profecto, si quum is opus faciat, qui imagi- 
nem facit ex ligno, Christus nullum prorsus opus 
feeerit, quum carnem suam fecerit ex pane. Quod si 
ullum opus fecerit, quin id bonum fuerit, nemo, opinor, 
dubitabit: nam si bonum opus fecit mulier, quse caput 
ejus perfudit unguento, quis potest ambigere an bonum 
opus fecerit Christus, quum corpus proprium et in 
cibum exhiberet hominibus, et in sacrificium offerret 
Deo? Quod si negari non potest nisi ab eo, qui in re 
inaxime seria valde velit nugari, bonum opus fecisse 
Christum, nee istud etiam negari potest, in Missa 
bonum opus facere sacerdotem, quippe qui non aliud 
facit in Missa quam Christus in Coena fecit, et cruce. 
Hoc enim declarant verba Christi : "H oc facite in meam 
commemorationem" quibus verbis quid aliud volebat, 
ut in Missa reprsesentarent ac facerent, quam quod ipse 
f aciebat in Coena et cruce ? Instituebat enim, et incho- 
abat in Coena sacramentum, quod in cruce perfecit: 
nam hac ratione potissimum nata esse videtur occasio, 
ut aqua ex Ecclesise ritu uno miscerietur in calice, 
quia aqua cum sanguine de latere morientis effluxit in 

Quum ergo negari non possit, quin bonum opus 
et in Ccena, et in cruce fecerit Christus, neque etiam 
quod sacerdos eadem reprsesentat ac facit in Missa, 
quomodo turn fingi potest Missam bonum opus non 

270 The Sacrament of the Altar 

be feigned that the Mass is not a good Work ? Where 
fore, since Luther so handles the Matter, as to say, 
That, because the Communion of one Layman does not 
profit another of the Laity, so neither does the Mass of 
the Priest profit the People; how dim of Sight is he 
himself, and how much does he endeavour to spread his 
Darkness over the Eyes of others, when he sees not that 
there is this Difference in the Case, That now the Laity 
receives out of the Priest s Hand, as the Apostles did 
first from Christ s ; and the priest performs what Christ 
did then perform; for he offers to God the same Body 
that was offered by Christ ? 

From whence also it appears how cold an Argument 
is Luther s Comparison of the Mass, with the Sacra 
ment of Baptism or Marriage; endeavouring to prove, 
that, because one Layman cannot be baptized for an 
other, nor marry a Wife for another Man; so a Priest 
cannot celebrate Mass for any other Person! For he 
openly puts Marriage out of the Number of the Sacra 
ments, and Baptism too, under a Colour ; when he says, 
That really there is but one Sacrament: Why then does 
he now compare Baptism and Marriage with the Sacra 
ment of the Mass, if he does not hold them to be Sacra 
ments ? 

And although he should confess them both to be 
Sacraments, (as indeed they are) yet is neither of them 
to be compared to this of the Mass ; but in such Manner 
as this Sacrament, which is the proper Body of him 
who is Lord of all Sacraments, may have a Prerogative 
above all other, which he himself made ; since it is mani 
fest, that the Priest, in administering all other Sacra 
ments, does Good to all those who receive them; so in 
this, while he offers it in the Mass, he is profitable, and 
communicates Good to all. 

Otherwise, if Luther exact with such Severity, that 

De Sacramento Eucliaristioe 271 

Quamobrem etiam quum Lutherus ita rem tractet, ut 
quia laici communio alter! non prodest laico, ideo nee 
sacerdotis Missa prosit populo, vehementer ipse coecutit, 
dum tenebras aliis conatur effundere, quum non videat 
hoc interesse, quod laicus nunc recipit tantum e manu 
sacerdotis, sicut primo receperunt apostoli e manu 
Christi, sacerdos vero facit quod turn fecit Christus, 
nam idem corpus offert Deo, quod obtulit Christus. Qua 
ex re et illud patet, quam frigidum argumentum sit, quo 
Missam comparat cum sacramento Baptismi, aut Con- 
jugii, contendens efficere ut, quoniam laicus baptizari 
non potest pro alio, aut pro alio uxorem ducere, ideo nee 
sacerdos Missam pro alio possit celebrare: nam Con- 
jugium plane sustulit e sacramentis, et recte etiam Bap- 
tismum, quum dicit non esse vere, nisi unum sacra- 
mentum. Cur ergo nunc Baptismum comparat, et 
Conjugium cum sacramento Missae, si ilia non habet 
pro sacramentis ? Quanquam etiam si utrumque f atere- 
tur esse sacramentum (quod revera sunt), tamen 
neutrum erat sic comparandum huic sacramento Missse, 
quin hoc sacramentum, quod est proprium corpus 
ipsius, qui Dominus est sacramentorum omnium, sacra- 
menta reliqua possit, quse fecit ipse, singular! aliqua 
prserogativa praecellere, quum clare constet quod, 
quemadmodum in omnibus aliis sacramentis sacerdos 
prodest ministrando singulis, sic in hoc sacramento, 
dum offert in Missa, prodest, et bonum communicat uni- 

Alioqui si tarn severe Lutherus exigat ut omnia sacra- 

272 The Sacrament of the Altar 

all Sacraments should be alike, and no Difference 
amongst them; and that, in the Sacrament of the 
Eucharist, the Priest s Condition is no better than that 
of the Laity ; why compels he not the Priest to receive 
the Communion from the Hands of another, and not 
suffer him to take it himself, though he can consecrate 
it ; even as he cannot absolve himself, though he has the 
Keys of Penance ? 

And what he says of Faith, which he believes all Men 
are to have in their own Persons, and that not the 
Priest s, but every Man s own Faith, is that which 
profits him, even (says he) as Abraham has not believed 
for all the Jews. I allow it to be very true; yet it 
proves no more than what it proposes : For neither has 
Christ himself, offered by himself on the Cross, saved 
the People, without every Man s particular Faith ; that 
none may think the Mass of any Priest should do it; 
yet the Mass of every Priest helps those to Salvation, 
who, by their Faith, have deserved to be Partakers of 
the greatest Good communicated in the Mass to many. 

It may likewise be sometimes advantageous to the 
procuring the Infusion of Faith into the Unfaithful, as 
it is procured by the Death and Passion of Christ, that 
Grace should be given to the Gentiles; by which, 
through the Hearing of the Word, they might come to 
the Understanding of the Faith of Christ. 

Sacrifice of tbe 
BUT Luther easily perceives, that it is no hard Matter 
to destroy what he himself has built, if Mass can be a 
Sacrifice or Offering, which may be offered to God ; he 
therefore promises to remove this Obstacle, which, that he 
may the more easily seem to do, he objects against himself 
such Things, as he perceives to stand in his Way. And 
now, (says he) another, the greatest and most spacious 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 273 

menta sint inter se similia, et in Eucharistiae sacra- 
mento nihilo potior sit sacerdotis conditio, quam laico- 
rum, quare non cogit ut sacerdos alterius manu semper 
communicet, nee sinatur sibi sacramentum sumere, 
quanquam potest conficere, quemadmodum, licet claves 
habeat Poenitentia?, semet non potest absolvere? Nam 
quod affert de fide, quam a singulis censet oportere 
prsestari, et suam cuique fidem prodesse, non sacerdotis, 
quemadmodum nee Abraham, ut ait, pro omnibus 
Juda3is credidit, istud quidem verum dicit, at nihil 
tamen magis id probat, quod proponit: nam neque 
Christus ipse a semet oblatus in cruce sine sua cujusque 
fide servavit populum, ne quis id Missam putet cujusque 
sacerdotis efficere, quse tamen Missa cujuslibet sacer 
dotis illis prodest ad salutem, quorum propria fides 
meruit ut boni, quod tarn immensum Missa communicat 
multis, possint esse participes. Quanquam potest et ad 
hoc valere nonnunquam, ut incredulo quoque fidem pro- 
curet infundi, quemadmodum Christi mors et Passio 
procuravit ut gratia daretur Gentibus, qua per auditum 
verbi venirent in fidem Christi. 

2>e Saccificto 

SED Lutherus satis sentit ipse facile destrui quicquid 
astruxerat, si Missa possit esse sacrificium, aut oblatio, 
quse offeratur Deo. Hanc igitur obicem se pollicetur 
amoturum, quod quo fidelius facere videatur, et effica- 
cius, objicit sibi ipse prius quasdam, quse sibi sentit ob~ 
stare. "Jam et alterum," inquit, "scandalum amoven- 
dum est, quod multo grandius est, et speciosissimum, id 

274 The Sacrament of the Altar 

of all Scandals, is to be taken away, that is, Mass be 
lieved every where to be a Sacrifice offered to God; 
which Opinion the Words of the Canon seem to favour, 
where it is said these G-ifts, these Presents, and these 
holy Sacrifices; and below that, this Offering. He like 
wise complains, that it is taken for a Sacrifice, &c. 
From thence Christ is called the Host of the Altar. To 
this may be added the Words of the holy Fathers, so 
many Examples, and the constant Custom observed 
over the whole World. 

You see, gentle Reader, what Blocks he himself finds 
standing in his Way: Take Notice now with what 
Herculean Strength he undertakes to remove them : But 
to all these, (says he) are constantly to be opposed the 
Words and Example of Christ. But pray what Words 
of Christ are these, which have been unknown to so 
many holy Fathers in Times past, and to the whole 
Church of Christ, during so many Ages, and now, by 
Luther, like a new Esdras, found out ? This he declares 
himself, when he says, For unless we bring it to pass, 
that Mass be accounted a Promise or Testament, as the 
Words, clearly make out ; we lose the whole Gospel, and 
all Comfort: These are his Words: It now remains 
that we see his Example. f Christ, says he, at his last 
Supper, when he instituted this Sacrament, and be 
queathed the Testament, offered it not to God the 
Father, and has not performed it as a good Work for 
others; but sitting at the Table, he proposed the same 
Testament, and exhibited a Sign to every one of them. 
Those are therefore the Words of Christ ! This is the 
Example, by which, now at last, only Luther himself 
clearly sees Mass neither to be a Sacrifice, nor Offer 
ing ! It is a Wonder that, of so many holy Fathers, of 
so many Eyes which have read the Gospel in the Church 
for so many Ages, none was ever so quick-sighted, as 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 275 

est, quod Missa creditur passim esse sacrificium, quod 
offertur Deo. In quam opinionem et verba Canonis 
sonare videntur, ubi dicitur : Jicec dona, hcec munera, 
licec sancta sacrificia, et infra: hanc oblationem; item 
clarissime postulatur ut acceptum sit sacrificium, sicut 
sacrificium Abel, etc. Inde Christus hostia altaris 
dicitur. Accedunt his dicta sanctorum Patrum, tot ex- 
empla, tantusque usus per orbem constanter obser- 

Audisti, lector, quas obices ipse sibi sentit objectas; 
audi nunc vicissim quam Herculeis viribus aggreditur 
amovere. "His omnibus," inquit, "oportet constantis- 
sime opponere verbum et exemplum Christi." At quse 
sunt igitur ilia verba Christi, quse tot olim sanctis 
Patribus, ac toti Christi Ecclesise tot ignorata sseculis, 
velut novus Esdras iiobis Lutherus invenit ? Hoc de- 
clarat ipse, quum dicit: "Nisi enim Missam obtinueri- 
mus esse promissionem, seu testamentum, ut verba clare 
sonant, totum evangelium, et universum solatium amit- 
timus." Verba nunc audivimus ; restat ut videamus 
exemplum: exemplum ergo subjungit. "Christus," in- 
quit, "in Co3na novissima, quum institueret hoc sacra- 
mentum, et condidit testamentum, non obtulit ipsum 
Deo Patri, aut ut opus bonum pro aliis perfecit, sed in 
mensa sedens singulis idem testamentum proposuit, et 
signum exhibuit." Ista sunt ergo verba Christi, istud 
est exemplum, e quibus nunc demum Lutherus unus 
perspicue videt Missam non esse sacrificium, nee obla- 
tionem. Mirum est igitur ex tot sanctis Patribus, ex 
tot oculis, quot in Ecclesia tarn multis sseculis idem 
legerunt evangelium, nullum fuisse unquam tarn per- 
spicacem, ut rem tarn apertam deprehenderet, imo 
omnes etiamnum tarn csecos esse, ut ne adhuc quidem 
queant id quod cernere se Lutherus jactat, quanquam 

276 The Sacrament of the Altar 

to perceive a Thing so apparent ; and that at this pres 
ent Time they are all so blind, as not to discern what 
Luther (though he points it out with his Finger,) brags 
so clearly to see himself! Is not Luther rather mis 
taken, and thinks himself to see something, which in 
Reality he sees not, or endeavours to shew us with his 
Finger, that which is no-where to be found ? For pray 
what Sort of Proof is that where he undertakes to 
teach f that Mass is no Sacrifice, because it is a Prom 
ise/ as if Promise and Sacrifice were as repugnant to 
gether as Heat and Cold ? Which Reason of his is alto 
gether so weak, that it seems not worthy an Answer. 
For the so many Sacrifices of Moses s Laws, though all 
Figures of Things to come, yet were they Promises in 
themselves, promising the Things for which they were 
done; not only the Future, of which they were Fig 
ures, but also Deliverances, Expiations, Purgations and 
Purifications, of the People then present, for whom 
they were solemnly offered every Year. Which Thing 
being so apparent, that it leaves no Plea for Ignorance, 
makes Luther s Dissimulation appear altogether ridicu 
lous ; when arguing that this Thing cannot be done ; 
which not only he himself, but all the People know to 
have been so often performed. 

]STow come we to the Example of Christ, by which 
Luther thinks he so vehemently oppresses us ; because 
Christ, in his last Supper, did not use the Sacrament for 
a Sacrifice, nor has he offered it to his Father: Out of 
which he goes about to prove, That the Mass, which 
ought to agree with the Example of Christ, by whom it 
was instituted, cannot be a Sacrifice or Offering. 7 

If Luther so rigidly summons us to the Example of 
our Lord s Supper, as not to permit the Priest to do 
any Thing that we do not read Christ to have done in 
it ; then must they never receive themselves in the Sac- 

De Sacramento Eucliaristice 277 

ipso monstrante, perspicere. Annon Lutherus halluci- 
natur potius, et aliquid se videre putat, quod non videt, 
et digito conatur ostendere, quod nusquam est ? 

E"am, obsecro, qualis est ista probatio, quum docere 
nititur Missam non esse sacrificium ex eo quod sit 
promissio ? quasi promissio et sacrificium ita sibi mutuo 
pugnarent, quemadmodum frigus et calor ? Quse Lu- 
theri ratio adeo prorsus friget, ut nee response digna 
videatur. Nam legis Mosaics tarn multa sacrificia, 
quanquam essent figurse omnia futurarum rerum, tamen 
promissiones erant et ipsa : promittebant enim ea, 
propter quse fiebant, non modo futura quondam ilia, 
quorum erant figurse, sed etiam liberationes, expia- 
tiones, purgationes, purificationes populi tune pra3- 
sentis, pro quo more solemni quotannis oiferebantur. 
Quae res quum tarn aperta sit, ut nemo prorsus earn 
possit ignorare, ridicula plane dissimulatio est ista Lu- 
theri, quum nunc argumentetur fieri id non posse, quod 
non ipse tantum, sed populus quoque novit tarn ssepe 

A T unc veniamus ad exemplum Christi, quo nos arbi- 
tratur Lutherus vehementer opprimi, propterea quod 
Christus in Coena sacramento non usus est pro sacrificio, 
nee obtulit Patri : ex quo probare conatur quod Missa, 
quse respondere debet exemplo Christi quo fuit insti- 
tuta, non potest esse sacrificium, nee oblatio. 

Si Lutherus tarn rigide nos revocet ad exemplum 
Co3nse dominicae, ut nihil sacerdotes permittat facere, 
quod ibi Christus fecisse non legitur, sacramentum, 
quod consecrant, nunquam ipsi recipient. Suum enim 

278 The Sacrament of the Altar 

rament which they consecrate: For we do not read in 
the Gospel, where it mentions the last Supper of our 
Lord, that our Lord himself received his own Body: 
and though some Doctors, and the whole Church, do 
hold that he did receive it: yet that makes nothing for 
Luther, who discredits not only all the Doctors, but the 
Faith of the whole Church ; and thinks not any Thing 
to be believed, but what is confirmed by Scriptures, and 
that clearly to; (for so he writes in the Sacrament of 
Orders.) In which Sort of Scripture, I am of Opinion, 
he will not find that Christ received his own Body at 
his last Supper. Whence it will follow, as I have said, 
that the Priests ought not to take what they consecrate 
themselves, if he binds us so strictly to the Example of 
the last Supper. But if then he allows that the Priests 
are to receive, because the Apostles did so ; and that he 
holds they are commanded to do what the Apostles did 
then, not what Christ has done; then must they never 
consecrate; for Christ , and not the Apostles, did then 
consecrate. The Matter itself shews, that, in this, the 
Priests do not only perform what Christ did in his last 
Supper, but also what he has afterwards done on the 
Cross; the Apostles leaving us some Things by Tradi 
tion, which Christ either never did, or which we do not 
read that he had done; as the Ceremonies and Signs 
used in the Consecration, of which I believe most are 
delivered down to us from the Apostles themselves. 
Furthermore, they repeat some Words in the Canon of 
the Mass, as if spoken by Christ himself, which are not 
read in Scripture; and yet there is no Doubt but he 
spoke them; for many Things were said and done by 
Christ, which are not recorded by any of the Evan 
gelists, but by the fresh Memory of those who were 
present: delivered afterwards, as it were, from Hand 
to Hand, from the very Times of the Apostles, down to 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 279 

corpus Christus in evangelic non legitur, ubi Coena 
scribitur, ipse recepisse. Nam quod Doctores aliquot 
eum recepisse tradunt, et quod idem canit Ecclesia, 
nihil potest pro Luthero facere, quum illi neque Doc- 
tores omnes, neque totius Ecclesiae fides ullam faciat 
fidem, neque credendum censeat quicquam (nam ita 
scribit in sacramento Ordinis) nisi firmatum Scrip- 
turis, et iisdem etiam claris, cujusmodi certe Scripturis, 
non opinor, inveniet quod suum corpus in Crena re- 
ceperit Christus; ex quo sequetur, ut dixi, nee sacer- 
dotes debere, quod consecrant ipsi, recipere, si tarn 
rigide nos obstringat Lutherus ad exemplum Coense 
dominicse. Quod si ideo concedat recipiendum sacer- 
dotibus, quia receperunt apostoli, et eos contendat id 
jussos facere, quod tune apostoli fecerunt, non quod 
Christus, hac ratione nunquam consecrabunt sacerdotes : 
consecrabat enim Christus, non apostoli. Res ergo 
docet non id solum sacerdotes in hoc sacramento facere, 
quod Christus fecit in Co3na, sed etiam quod postea 
fecit in cruce, qusedam etiam tradentibus apostolis, quse 
Christus aut nusquam fecit, aut certe non legitur 
usquam fecisse, cujusmodi sunt gestus et signa quibus 
utuntur dum consecrant : quorum ego nonnulla credo ab 
ipsis promanasse apostolis. 

Prseterea quod in Canone Missse qusedam verba velut 
a Christo prolata recensent, quse nusquam in Scriptura 
sacra leguntur, et tamen non dubitatur, quin dixerit: 
Multa enim dicta sunt et facta per Christum, quse 
nullus evangelistarum complectitur, sed qusedam re- 
cente memoria eorum, qui interfuerunt, velut per manus 
deinceps tradita, ab ipso apostolorum tempore ad nos 
usque pervenerunt. Lutherus non dubitat Christum in 

280 The Sacrament of the Altar 

us. Luther doubts not, that Christ said in his last 
Supper, As often as ye shall do this, ye shall do it in 
Commemoration of me: And he is so sure that they 
were Christ s Words, that, from thence he takes his 
Argument ; That Nobody is obliged to receive the Sac 
rament; but that it is left to every Man s Discretion, 
and that we are only bound, as often as we do it, to do 
it in Remembrance of Christ/ These very Words he 
does not read in the Evangelists concerning the Supper 
of our Lord : For no other Thing is read there, but, do 
this in Commemoration of me. 

Where then read he these, as often as ye shall do 
these Things ? Whether, not in the Mass ? Indeed I 
believe no where else. For the Apostles Words are not 
so : Wherefore, seeing he trusts so much in these Words, 
and uses them, because he finds them in the Canon; 
why does he not give so much Credit to that Part of 
the same Canon, in which Mass is called an Offering, 
and Sacrifice? 

Wherefore, if he confess that the Priests do rightly 
receive what they consecrate in the Mass, though no 
clear Scripture (which only he admits of,) testifies 
Christ to have done it at his last Supper, nor in any 
other Place ; he ought not to wonder if the Priest offers 
Christ to his Father ; which Christ himself has done on 
the Cross, as it is witnessed by clear Scripture in sev 
eral Places : For Luther s, own Arguments demonstrate, 
that the Cross belongs to the Testament made at the 
Supper, when he says, That the Testament involves 
the Death of the Testator, by which alone it can be 
made perfect. Moreover, it seems, as is said, that the 
mingling of Water with the Wine, had its Beginning 
from no other Place ; which Thing is not said by Scrip 
ture to be done at the last Supper, but on the Cross. 
Let Luther, therefore, forbear to oppose his trifling 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 281 

Coena dixisse: ff Hcec quotiescunque feceritis, in mei 
memoriam facietis," atque hsec usque adeo pro comperto 
habet Christi verba fuisse, ut inde sumat argumentum, 
neminem cogi ad recipiendum sacramentum, sed rem 
cujusque relictam arbitrio, tantum ad hoc adstringi, ut, 
quoties facimus, faciamus in memoriam Christi. Hsec 
ergo verba non legit apud evangelistas in Coena 
Domini: nam illic nihil aliud legitur, quam: "Hoc 
facite in mei commemorationem" Ubi ergo legit ilia 
verba : "Hoec quotiescunque feceritis/ annon in Missa ? 
Opinor certe non alibi : nam apud Apostolum alia sunt. 
Igitur qui tantum fidit, et utitur illis verbis, quia 
reperit in Canone, cur non pari fide suscipit ejusdem 
verba Canonis, quibus Missa oblatio dicitur, et sacri- 
ficium ? 

Quamobrem si sacerdotes in Missa fatetur recte 
recipere quod consecrant, quanquam nulla Scriptura 
clara (cujusmodi solam recipit Lutherus) Christum 
testetur illud nee in Coena fecisse, non usquam, non 
debet mirum videri Luthero, si sacerdos offerat Chris 
tum Patri, quod non uno loco, clara testante Scriptura, 
Christus ipse fecit in cruce ; nam crucem etiam ad testa- 
mentum in Coena f actum pertinere Lutheri quoque ratio 
demonstrat, quum testamentum dicit mortem testatoris 
involvere, utpote qua sola perficitur. Prseterea non 
aliunde, quod dixi, videtur et id institutum, ut aqua 
vino misceretur in sacramento: quse res non in Coena 
legitur esse facta, sed cruce. Desinat ergo Lutherus 
argumentum nugax opponere, ut, quia Christus in 
Coena sese non obtulit, ideo sacerdos non offerre creda- 
tur in Missa, in qua non solum reprsesentat quod in 

282 The Sacrament of the Altar 

Argument, That, because Christ at his last Supper did 
not offer himself, therefore the Priest must not be be 
lieved to offer him in the Mass : In which he not only 
represents what Christ performed in his last Supper, 
but also what he did on the Cross, on which he con 
summated what he began in the Supper. 

But now come we to the last of Luther s Arguments ; 
by which, as by a sacred Anchor, his Ship is sustained : 
Arid this is the most frivolous of all the rest. How 
can it be, (says he) that the Priest should offer to God 
what he takes himself ? It is not likely (says he) Mass 
should be a Sacrifice, when we receive it ourselves. The 
same Thing cannot be received and offered at one and 
the same Time, nor given and received by one and the 
same Person. 7 Luther deters us every-where from 
philosophical Reasonings, when he, in so sacred a 
Thing, endeavours to sustain himself by the merest 
Sophistry in the World. For pray was there ever a 
Sacrifice in Moses s Law, which was not taken by those 
who offered it? Or did God himself eat what they 
offered him ? Shall I eat the Flesh of Bulls., or drink 
the Blood of Goats, saith the Lord?* Besides, if 
Christ was both Priest and Sacrifice ; why could he not 
institute that the Priest, who should supply the same 
Sacrifice, might both offer and receive the Victim him 
self ? But lest I may seem, in this Case, to imitate 
Luther, who has nothing to say for himself, but what 
issues out of his own idle Brain ; I will lay before you 
what St. Ambrose says to the Mass, O Lord God, (says 
he) with how great Contrition of Heart, with what 
Fountains of Tears, with how great Reverence and 
Fear, with what Chastity and Purity of Mind that 
divine and cselestial Mystery is to be celebrated : Where 
thy Flesh is truly received; where thy Blood is truly 
*Ps. xlix. 13. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 283 

Ccena fecit Christus, sed etiam quod in cruce, in qua 
consummavit Christus quod inchoavit in Cosna. 

At postremum argumentum Lutheri, quo velut an- 
chora sacra sustinetur navis, omnium est nugacissimum. 
"Quomodo," inquit, "fieri potest ut sacerdos offerat Deo 
quod ipse sumit? Kepugnat," inquit, "Missam esse 
sacrificium, quum illam recipiamus : idem simul recipi 
et offerri non potest, nee ab eodem simul dari et accipi." 
Deterret nos ubique Lutherus a rationibus philosophi- 
cis, quum ipse in re tarn sacra se firmet in meracissimo 
sophismate : nam quod unquam f uit sacrificium in lege 
Mosaica, quod non sumebant qui offerebant ? An quod 
Deo offerebatur, ipse comedebat ? "Numquid ego man- 
ducabo carnes taurorum, aut sanguinem" inquit Deus, 
"hircorum potabof 

Prseterea si Christus et sacerdos fuit, et sacrificium, 
cur non potuit Christus instituere ut sacerdos, qui idem 
sacrificium reprsesentaret, victimam et oiferret, et 
sumeret ? Sed hac in re, ne Lutherum videar imitari, 
qui nihil habet pro se, nisi quod e suo fingit capite, af- 
feremus quod dicit beatus Ambrosius de Missa: a Quan- 
ta, ?? inquit, "cordis contritione, et lacrymarum fonte, 
quanta reverentia et tremore, quanta corporis castitate 
atque animi puritate istud divinum et creleste mys- 
terium est celebrandum, Domine Deus : ubi caro tua in 
veritate surnitur, ubi sanguis tuus in veritate bibitur, 
ubi summis ima, humanis divina junguntur: ubi adest 
sanctorum prsesentia, et angelorum: ubi tu es sacerdos 
et sacrificium mirabiliter et ineffabiliter ! Quis digne 

284 The Sacrament of the Altar 

drank; where the lowest is joined to the highest; and 
divine Things with human: Where the Saints and 
Angels are present; where, after an admirable and un 
speakable Manner, thyself are both Priest and Sacri 
fice! Who shall be able to celebrate this Mystery 
worthily, if then Almighty God do not render him 
worthy that offers ? You see how the holy Father, in 
this Place, calls Mass an Oblation, and says that Christ 
himself is both Priest and Sacrifice in it, even as he was 
on the Cross. Let Luther see how much he attributes 
to this Man s Authority ; but St. Gregory makes appear 
how much he had him in Esteem, when, in this Manner, 
he imitated him in his Writings : Which of the Faith 
ful (says he) can doubt, but that in the very Time of 
the Immolation, the Heavens are opened to the Words 
of the Priest, in that Mystery of Christ: That Choirs 
of Angels are present ; that the lowest Things are asso 
ciated to the highest: That Earth is joined with 
Heaven ; and that of Visible and Invisible is made one 
Thing? And in another Place, For this singular 
Victim, which renews to us the Death of the only Be 
gotten, does loose our Souls from eternal Death. Nor 
speaks he less to the Purpose, when he says, Hence 
therefore let us ponder with ourselves, how much that 
Sacrifice stands us in stead, which always imitates the 
Passion of the only begotten Son/ We see, that not 
only St. Ambrose, but also St. Gregory, calls Mass an 
Immolation and Sacrifice ; and confesses, that, not only 
the last Supper of Christ, (as Luther holds) but also his 
Passion is represented in it. 

But these Fathers alone were not of that Judgment, 
for St. Augustine confesses the same Thing, in divers 
Places, who says thus of the Mass, The Oblation is 
every Day renewed, though Christ has but once suf 
fered : Because we daily fall, therefore is Christ daily 

De Sacramento Eucharist ice 285 

hoc potest celebrare mysterium, nisi tu, Dens omni- 
potens, offerentem feceris dignum ?" 

Videtis ut hie beatissimus Pater et oblationem appel- 
lat Missam, et in eadem Christnm ipsum dicat et sacer- 
dotem esse, et sacrificium, quemadmodum fuit in cruce. 
Cujus anctoritati quantum Lutherus tribuat, viderit 
ipse: quantum vero tribuerit beatus Gregorius, facile 
declaravit, quum ilium imitatus ita scriberet: a Quis 
fidelium dubitare possit in ipsa immolationis hora ad 
sacerdotis vocem coelos aperiri, in illo Christi mysterio 
angelorum chores adesse, summis ima sociari, terram 
coalestibus jungi, unum quid ex visibilibus et invisibili- 
bus fieri ?" Et alibi : "Hsec namque singularis victima 
ab a3terno interitu animas solvit, quse illam nobis mor 
tem Unigeniti reparat." J^ec minus aperte quum dicit: 
u Hinc ergo pensemus quale sit pro nobis istud sacri- 
ficium, quod unigeniti Filii Passionem semper imita- 
tur." Videmus ut non solum divus Ambrosius ? sed et 
beatus Gregorius immolationem appellat Missam, et 
sacrificium, ac fatetur in ea non ultimam tantum 
Christi Comam, quod Lutherus ait, sed et Passionem 
ejus represent ari. Nee tamen istud soli censuerunt 
illi: nam et Augustinus non semel idem fatetur. Ait 
enim de Missa: "Iteratur quotidie haec oblatio, licet 
Christus semel passus sit ; quia quotidie labimur, Chris- 
tus pro nobis quotidie immolatur." Item : "Eucharistia 
est oblatio benedicta, per quam benedicimur, adscripta, 
per quam omnes in ccelum adscribimur, rata, per quam 
in visceribus Christi censemur." 

286 The Sacrament of the Altar 

offered for us. Also the Eucharist is a blessed Offering 
by which we are blessed ; an Enrollment, by which we 
all are enrolled in Heaven ; a Ratification, whereby we 
are mustered in the Bowels of Christ. 7 

Seeing, therefore, that Mass is by so holy and learned 
Men called an Offering, and a Sacrifice ; and that they 
are of Opinion, that not only the last Supper of Christ, 
but also his Passion is by it commemorated ; that they 
confess so immense and great Advantages to proceed 
from it ; and that the Church, agreeing with them, sings 
the same in the whole Mass : I much admire with what 
Face Luther dares to cry out, on the Contrary, that 
Mass is no Sacrifice or Offering ; and that it brings no 
Profit to the People ; deriding the Authority of so many 
holy Fathers, or rather of the whole Church, by his 
most vain Device; as if they were all Things, which 
were understood of the Reliques of the Jewish Cere 
monies, (in which he says, the Priest did heave up 
what was offered by the People. ) Which Comment of 
Luther s did seem so foolish and absurd, even to him 
self, that he doubted whether he should withstand the 
Sentiments of the holy Fathers, and the Customs of the 
whole Church, by such a babbling Argument, or rather 
openly despise them : For, says he, what shall we say to 
the Canons and Authorities of the Fathers ? I answer, 
says he, that if we have nothing at all to say against 
them; it is more safe to deny all Things, than to con 
fess that Mass is a Work or Sacrifice, lest we deny the 
Words of Christ, corrupting them together with the 
Mass. Nevertheless, that we may agree with them also, 
we will say that all these Things were the Reliques of 
Jewish Ceremonies. Lest, therefore, there should be 
nothing said, this civil Man, tendering the Repute of 
the holy Fathers, and the Honour of the whole Church, 
(lest they might be thought to speak foolishly) will seem 

De Sacramento Eucharistiw 287 

Quum igitur viri tarn eruditi, tarn sancti, Missam 
dicant oblationem, et sacrificium, quum per earn non 
Coenam tantum sentiant, sed etiam Passionem Christ! 
commemorari, quum inde tarn immensa bona provenire 
fateantur, quum iisdem consentiens, eadem in Missa 
tota decantet Ecclesia, vehementer admiror qua fronte 
Lutherus audeat clamare contrarium, Missam non esse 
sacrificium, non esse oblationem, non prodesse populo, 
eludens auctoritatem tot sanctorum Patrum, imo totius 
Ecclesise vanissimo figmento suo, quasi omnia quse de 
oblatione et sacrificio fiunt, et dicuntur in Missa, intelli- 
gerentur de reliquiis judaici ritus, quo levasse dicit 
sacerdotem ea quae offerebantur a populo. Quod Lu- 
theri commentum tarn ineptum visum est et tarn ab- 
surdum etiam ipsi Luthero, ut dubitaverit an sanctorum 
Patrum sententias, et Ecclesise totius consuetudinem 
tarn futili ratione defenderet, an potius ex professo con- 
temneret. E"am : "Quid dicemus," inquit, "ad Canones, 
et auctoritates Patrum? Respondeo," inquit, "si nihil 
habetur, quod dicatur, tutius est omnia negare, quam 
Missam concedere opus, aut sacrificium esse, ne verbum 
Christi negemus, simul cum Missa pessumdantes : 
tamen quo servemus et eos, dicemus ilia omnia reliquias 
esse ritus judaici." 

Ergo ne nihil dicatur, homo civilis, et honori sanc 
torum Patrum parcens, et honori totius Ecclesise, tan- 
quam officii gratia, ne stulte loqui viderentur, prse 
clarum illud figmentum suum de reliquiis judaici ritus 

288 The Sacrament of the Altar 

to oblige them, by covering their Shame with the Veil 
of his most excellent Devices, concerning the Reliques 
of the Jewish Rites ; which, if any Body remove, it will 
be to their Danger. For Luther does not ingeniously 
apprehend, that if any one urge him more narrowly, 
he would rather blow away all the Testimonies of the 
holy Fathers, and the Customs of the Church, than that 
he should allow Mass to be a good Work, or a Sacrifice ; 
that is, rather than allow that to be true which is true : 
Tor in that (he says) they deny Christ s Words, and 
corrupt Faith with Mass, who affirm Mass to be a Sacri 
fice: I suppose that none will believe him, unless he 
first shews that he has read another Gospel different 
from that the holy Fathers ever read, or that in reading 
the same, he has been more diligent than they, or has 
better understood it ; or finally, that he is more careful 
about Faith, than ever any Man before him was. 

But I believe he will not prefer any other Gospel 
unto us; nor, if he do, will it be admitted, though 
an Angel from Heaven should descend with it. And 
that which he proffers, has not been more diligently ex 
amined, nor more narrowly pryed into by him, than it 
has been tryed and searched into by others heretofore ; 
of whom none ever said, that they found in it what he 
boasts himself to have found, viz. That Mass is not a 
good Work; that it is not an Oblation, nor a Sacrifice. 
Lastly, if any one diligently considers what has been 
written by the one and the other, he cannot be ignorant 
what Difference has been in their Care about Faith: 
Those holy antient Fathers have observed, that, as this 
is the chiefest of all Sacraments, as containing in it the 
Lord of Sacraments; so is it the only Sacrifice, which 
alone remains, instead of so many Sacrifices of the Old 
Law ; and lastly, of all the Works that can be done for 
the Salvation of the People, this, without Comparison, 

DQ Sacramento Eucharist iw 289 

pro velamento dignatus est eorum pudendis prsetexere; 
quod si quis admoveat, illorum periculo fecerit: nam 
Lutherus ingenue non veretur, si quis eum stringat 
arctius, quicquid unquam fuit sanctorum Patrum, quic- 
quid unquam in Ecclesia moris fuit, exsufflare potius 
videlicet, quam concedat Missam bonum opus esse, vel 
sacrificium, hoc est, potius quam concedat verum esse, 
quod verum est. Nam quod ait eos negare verbum 
Christi, ac fidem simul cum Missa pessumdare, qui- 
cumque dicunt Missam esse sacrificium, nemo est, 
opinor, qui credat hac in parte Luthero, nisi primum 
doceat aut aliud evangelium legisse se, quam sancti illi 
Patres legerunt, aut illud idem vel legisse diligentius, 
vel intellexisse melius, aut sibi denique majorem esse 
curam fidei, quam ulli unquam hactenus mortalium 
fuerit. At evangelium, credo, non proferet nobis aliud ; 
neque, si proferet, audietur, etiamsi angelus cum eo de 
coelo descenderit. Illud vero, quod profert, neque dili 
gentius excussit, neque perspicit acutius, quam olim et 
excussum est, et perspectum ab illis, quorum nemo se 
reperisse dixit illic, quod nunc iste jactat reperisse sese, 
Missam bonum opus non esse, non esse oblationem, 
non esse sacrificium; denique fidei cura cujusmodi 
fuit utrique, non potest cuiquam esse obscurum, 
qui quid utrinque scriptum sit, non oscitanter expen- 

Veteres illi viri sanctissimi viderunt sicut sacra- 
mentorum omnium hoc esse summum, quod ipsuni 
sacramentorum Dominum complectatur, ita sacrificio- 
rum omnium hoc esse unicum, quod solum in loco tot 
olim sacrificiorum restiterit, postremo operum omnium, 
quse pro salute populi fieri possunt, longe lateque salu- 

290 The Sacrament of the Altar 

is the best and most wholesome. For when other Sacra 
ments are only profitable to particular Persons receiv 
ing them : This, in the Mass, is beneficial to all, in gen 
eral. And when Prayers made to God by one Man for 
another, may not only be hindered, but also rendered 
ineffectual, through the Fault of Men; the merciful 
Bounty of God has instituted Mass for the Salvation of 
the Faithful ; in which his own Body should be offered 
a Sacrifice so wholesome, that the Wickedness of the 
Minister, be it never so great, is not able to lessen, or 
avert the Benefit of it from the People. 

The most holy Fathers seeing these Things, took all 
possible Care, and used their utmost Endeavours, that 
the greatest Faith imaginable should be had towards 
this most propitiatory Sacrament ; and that it should be 
worshipped with the greatest Honour possible : And for 
that Cause, amongst many other Things, they, with 
great Care, delivered us this also; That the Bread and 
Wine do not remain in the Eucharist, but is truly 
changed into the Body and Blood of Christ. They 
taught Mass to be a Sacrifice, in which Christ himself 
is truly offered for the Sins of Christian People: And 
so far as it was lawful for Mortals, they adorned this 
immortal Mystery with venerable Worship, and mys 
tical Rites : They commanded the People to be present 
in Adoration of it, whilst it is celebrated, for the pro 
curing of their Salvation. Finally, lest the Laity, by 
forbearing to receive the Sacrament, should, by little 
and little, omit it f or-good-and-all ; they have estab 
lished an Obligation that every Man shall receive at 
least once in a Year. By those Things, and many of the 
like Nature, the holy Fathers of the Church, in several 
Ages, have demonstrated their Care for the Faith arid 
Veneration of this adorable Sacrament. Luther ought 

De Sacramento Eucliaristiae 291 

berrimum. Nam. quum csetera sacramenta prosint 
singulis, solum hoc in Missa prodest universis ; et quum 
omnes orationes, quibus alius pro alio intercedit apud 
Deuin, nori impediri tantum, sed et frustra fieri possint 
hominum vitio, misericors Dei dementia Missam insti- 
tuit pro salute fidelium, in qua suum ipsius corpus 
offer retur tarn salubre sacrificium, ut ejus fructum 
nullius ministri quantavis iniquitas a populo suo vel 
avertere possit, vel imminuere. 

Hsec Patres illi sanctissimi quum vidissent, summam 
habuerunt curam, summam adhibuere diligentiam, 
ut propitiatorium hoc sacramentum et fide quam 
maxima posset, haberetur, et honore quam posset 
maximo, coleretur; eoque quum alia inulta, turn hoc 
quoque sedulo tradiderunt, panem et vinum in 
Eucharistia non manere, sed in carnem et sanguinem 
Christi veraciter esse conversa. Missam sacrificium 
esse docuerunt, in quo Christus ipse pro populi 
Christiani peccatis immolatur. Turn, quoad mortali- 
bus licet, immortale mysterium venerando cultu, et 
mysticis ornarunt ritibus; populum, dum celebratur, 
in suse salutis procuratione venerabundum adesse 
jusserunt. Denique, ne laici desuetudine recipiendi 
sacramenti paulatim ex toto desinerent, sanxerunt ut 
semel saltern quotannis Eucharistiam quisque sus- 
ciperet. His igitur, atque aliis ejusmodi multis sancti 
Patres Ecclesise aliis alii temporibus sollicitudinem 
suam circa sacramenti hujus reverendi fidem veneratio- 
nemque declararunt. Ideo jactare non debet Lutherus 
(id quod jactat tamen) eos, qui Missam dicunt 
esse sacrificium, aut alii quam sumenti prodesse, 
verbum Christi, fidemque, ac Missam ipsam pessum- 

292 The Sacrament of the Altar 

not therefore to boast (what nevertheless he does) that 
they who call Mass a Sacrifice, or say that it is profit 
able to any, but to him who receives the Sacrament in 
it, does corrupt the Word of Christ, Faith, and Mass 

But it will not be amiss, to consider after what Man 
ner Luther sustains upon his Shoulders the Word of 
Christ, Faith, and Mass itself, that they may not be 
come corrupted, or fall. First of all, he changes the 
Name itself of the Sacrament, into a worse; and that 
which was, for so many Ages, called the Eucharist, or 
the Sacrament of Christ s Body, lest the Name of it 
should put the Auditors in Mind of the Majesty of it, 
he commands to be called Bread : Afterwards the Bread 
and Wine, which the Antients held to be turned into the 
Body and Blood of our Lord, are by Luther taught to 
remain entire; that so, by little and little, he may 
traduce the Honour from Christ to the Bread. After 
this, though he does not condemn the Church for having 
adorned and amplified Mass, with Rites and Cere 
monies ; yet he thinks it should be more Christian-like, 
if the Pomp of Vestments, Singing, Gestures and other 
Ceremonies were laid aside; that so it might be more 
like and near to the first Mass of all, which Christ cele 
brated in his last Supper with his Apostles ; or rather, 
that nothing may be left that might move the simple 
Minds of the vulgar Sort, and bring them to the Wor 
ship of this invisible Deity, through the Majesty of 
visible Honour. Moreover, he teacheth, and as much 
as in him lies, inculcates, that Mass is not a good Work, 
not a Sacrifice, not an Oblation, nor profitable to any 
of the People. To what Purpose pray is this so evan 
gelical a Lecture? It is, that all the People, leaving 
Mass to the Priest, (to whom alone they must be per 
suaded that it is profitable) may themselves neglect it, 

De Sacramento Eucharisfice 293 

dare. At Lutherus Christ! verbum, fidemque, ac 
Missam ipsam, ne pessumdentur et corruant, quo pacto 
suis humeris sustinet, id vero vicissim considerare 

Initio nomen ipsum sacramenti demutat in deterius, 
et quum tot sgeculis appellatum sit Eucharistia, vel 
sacramentum corporis Christi, ille, ne nomen audientes 
admoneat majestatis rei, jubet vocari panem. Deinde 
panem et vinum, quse veteres conversa fatentur in 
corpus et sanguinem Domini, Lutherus adhuc manere 
docet integra, ut ordine paulatim honorem a Christo 
traducat in panem. Turn licet non damnet Ecclesiam, 
quae ritibus et cserimoniis ornavit, et ampliavit Missam, 
tamen censet quod Missa foret multo christianior, si 
vestium, cantuum, gestuum et cseterarum cserimoniarum 
omnium pompa tolleretur, ut esset vicinior et similior 
primse omnium Missse, quam Christus in Coena cele- 
bravit cum apostolis, imo vero, ut quam minimum 
supersit eorum qua? simplices animos plebeculse com- 
moveant, et in venerationem numinis invisibilis visibilis 
honoris ma j estate convertant. Ad hsec docet, et om 
nibus modis inculcat Missam bonum opus non esse, sac- 
rificium non esse, oblationem non esse, nemini prorsus e 
populo prodesse. Quorsum hsec tarn sancta et evan- 
gelica lectio? Nempe ut populus totus, Missa relicta 
sacerdoti, cui soli prodesse persuasum habeant, negli- 
gant ipsi, et suum officium rei sibi inutili subducant: 
denique ut ipsi, quando communicantur, tantum fidem 
afferant testamenti se fore compotes, qualescumque con- 
scientias attulerint, imo quo magis erroneas attulerint, 
et peccatorum vel morsu, vel titillatione turbatas, tanto 

294 The Sacrament of the Altar 

and pay no Duty to a Thing unprofitable to them. 
Lastly, that when they communicate, if they only have 
but Faith, that they are about to receive the Testament ; 
whatsoever Consciences they bring; nay, the more er 
roneous they are, and the more troubled with the Sting 
and Concupiscence of Sin, the more are they to assure 
themselves that they are Partakers of the divine Prom 
ises ; especially, because this Sacrament is the Medicine 
of Sins past, present, and to come ; which would find no 
Room for itself in those who should purge themselves 
with greatest Anxiety from the Diseases of Sin; and, 
according to the Precept of the Apostle, proving them 
selves,* they may approach our Lord s Table with as 
pure and sincere a Conscience as may be possible ; that 
seeing they cannot say we are justified, at least they may 
say we are guilty of nothing to ourselves. After Luther, 
therefore, has taught this short and compendious Prep 
aration for receiving the Eucharist, to wit, in the Faith 
alone of the Promise; without any good Works, and a 
light Examination of Conscience; he, that nothing be 
wanting to the absolute Sanctity of receiving the Sacra 
ment; shews his Desire concerning what Time, and 
how often he is willing the People should be obliged to 
receive ; and that is, in no Time at all. And why so ? 
What? Is there any one so blind, as not to see what 
this so palpable a Matter drives at ? Certainly nothing 
else, but that the People may, by Degrees, quite give 
over communicating at all; who at first changed the 
daily receiving, into a Seventh-day communicating ; and 
after, to a longer Time; and at last would forsake it 
altogether ; if the Fathers, fearing that should happen, 
had not decreed, that every Man should receive thrice 
in a Year; threatening, that he who would not obey, 
should not be accounted a Christian: Yet nevertheless 
*I. Cor. xi. 28. 

De Sacramento Eucharistiw 295 

magis se noverint divinse promissionis esse participes; 
prsesertim quum sacramentum hoc sit medicina pecca- 
torum prseteritorum, prsesentium et futurorum, qua? 
nullum sibi locum reperiret, scilicet in eo, qui nimis 
anxie semet prius ideo a peccati morbo purgaverit, ut 
secundum Apostoli pneceptum probans semetipsum, 
conscientia quam maxime potest pura et sincera discum- 
bat in mensa Domini, ut quum dicere non possit: 
Justificatus sum, illud saltern possit : Nullius mini con- 
scius sum. 

Lutherus ergo, posteaquam praiparationem istam 
docuit brevem et compendiariam ad suscipiendam 
Eucharistiam, nempe in sola fide promissionis, nullis 
operibus bonis, levissima disquisitione conscientiaB, pos- 
tremo, ne quicquam desit absolutse sanctimonise ad sus- 
cipiendum sacramentum, suum votum aperit quoties, et 
quibus anni temporibus potissimum velit cogi populum 
communionem sumere, nempe prorsus nullo. Quid ita ? 
quid ? An quisquam tarn caacus est, ut non videat quor- 
sum haBC tarn putida tendant? Certe non aliorsum, 
quam ut populus sensim a communione sacramenti 
desciscat in totum, qui primum a quotidiana com 
munione deflexit in septimum quemque diem, post in 
longius distulit : tandem destituturus videbatur omnino, 
nisi Patres illud veriti sanxissent, ut ter in anno 
quisque communicaret, interminati non habendum pro 
Cbristiano, qui non obtemperas set : at nee id tamen diu 
potuit obtineri. Quamobrem adultimum eo descensum 
est, ut inferius descendi non possit, nisi ferme prorsus 
ad inferos, nempe ut semel saltern in anno communi- 

296 The Sacrament of the Altar 

that Custom could they not continue long; so that, at 
last, the Matter fell so low, that it could descend no 
lower; for now we are obliged to receive but once in a 
Year: Which Custom, if Luther could demolish, as he 
endeavours, the World would e er long (through the 
Decay of the Fervour of Faith) be reduced to what it 
should have come to long ago, if it had not been pre 
vented by this solemn Custom of receiving every Year ; 
that at last there would scarce remain the least Foot 
step of the Communion amongst the People, nor per 
haps, among the Clergy neither, if Luther could bring 
it about that Mass should be so spoiled, not only of its 
Preparation and Ceremonies, but also of the People s 
Resort, Hope and Veneration to it. These are the ex 
cellent Promises of Luther; this is that spacious Liberty 
he promises to all those who forsake the Catholic 
Church to follow him, viz. That they may be freed at 
last from the Use and Faith of the Sacrament ! Where 
fore, I forbear to speak any more of this Thing, as being 
so clear in itself, that it needs no further Dispute. And 
seeing we have discovered the crafty Winding of the 
subtil Serpent; which being now seen, (as without 
Doubt they are by all who are not quite blind) it is not 
necessary to exhort any Body to shun such apparent 
Evils. I believe none are so mad, as to forsake the 
Church of God, for the Synagogue of Satan. That, 
shunning the Service of Christ, (to serve whom is to 
reign) he may list himself into the Liberty proposed 
by Luther; where, under the Name of Liberty, he 
should wilfully, and to his own Knowledge put his Foot 
into the Snare of the Devil. But rather let all the 
Faithful of Christ say with the Psalmist, W e will not 
decline from thy Judgments, because thou hast ap 
pointed us a Law.* 

*Ps. cxviii. 102. 

De Sacramento Eucharistice 297 

ceimis: quam consuetudinem si Lutherus, ut optat, 
posset amoliri, mundus, refrigescente in dies fervore 
fidei, propediem profecto redigeretur eo, quo jam 
pridem pervenisset, nisi hoc solemni quotannis com- 
municandi ritu fuisset retentus, ut aliquando nullum 
ferme remaneat in populo communicandi vestigium, 
fortasse nee in clero quidem, si Lutherus obtinere 
possit, ut Missa non apparatu tantum, et cserimoniis, 
sed populi quoque frequentia, spe ac veneratione spoli- 

Hsec sunt ergo prseclara ilia promissa Lutheri. Hsec 
est speciosa ilia libertas, quam pollicetur ex Ecclesia 
catholica venientibus ad se, nempe ut liberentur ali 
quando ab usu et fide sacramenti. Quamobrem ego hac 
de re amplius disputare super sedeo, utpote re magis ex 
se perspicua, quam ut cuiquam disputari debuerit. Tan- 
turn indicasse non oberit astutissimas versuti serpentis 
insidias, quibus jam perspectis (perspicit enim, non 
dubito, quisquis non plane csecus est), non erit opus 
hortari quemquam ut prsevisa mala devitet. Nemo erit, 
opinor, tarn vecors, ut ex Ecclesia Dei desciscat in syna- 
gogam Satanae, e Christi servitute fugiens, cui servire 
regnare est, asserat se in libertatem propositam a Lu- 
thero, ubi solo libertatis nomine, sciens prudensque in 
prgemonstratas diaboli pedicas injiciat pedes. Sed una 
cum psalmista omnes Christi fideles hunc versum 
clament: ff A judiciis tuis non declinavimus, quid tu 
legem posuisti nobis." 


f Baptism 

As for the rest of the Sacraments, it is not necessary 
to stand long upon them; most of them he takes quite 
away from us: And the Sacrament of the Eucharist, 
(being almost the only one he vouchsafed to leave us) 
has by him been handled in such a Manner, as we have 
already shewn you; so that none can doubt but he de 
vised by little and little, to demolish this also : ISTor does 
he praise any one of the Sacraments, unless to the Preju 
dice of another ; for he so much extols Baptism, that he 
depresses Penance: Though he has treated of Baptism 
itself after such a Manner, that it had been better he 
had not touched it at all. For first of all, that he might 
seem to treat with a great deal of Sanctity in a Matter 
so holy, he, by a long Discourse, teaches that the divine 
Promise is to be believed, by which he promises Salva- 
rion to them who believe, and are baptized. He is 
angry, and reproaches the Church for not teaching this 
Faith to the Christians; as if in any Place they were 
so ignorant of Christian Faith, as not to understand 
this : And yet Luther proposes it for a new Thing, al 
most never before heard of, to the Reproach of all the 

But this is no new Method of his Proceedings, to 
trifle in Things known, as though they had before never 
been heard of. And having in many Words shewn what 
this Faith is, he afterwards extols the Riches of Faith, 
to the End he may render us poor of good Works, with 
out which (as St. James saith*) Faith is altogether dead. 
*James ii. 17-26. 


Be Sacramento Baptismi 

KELIQUIS ergo sacramentis nihil opus est immorari, 
quorum pleraque omnia tollit, quum Eucharistise sacra- 
mentum, quod unicum ferme relinquere videbatur, 
tamen, ut ostendimus, ita tractarit, ut nemini relinquat 
dubium quin et illud quoque paulatim machinetur 
amoliri; nee ullum sane sacramentum laudat, nisi in 
alter ius injuriam. Nam sic et Baptismum effert, ut 
deprimat Poenitentiam. Quamquam Baptismum etiam 
ipsum tractavit sic, ut satius multo fuerit non attigisse. 
Nam. primum, quo videretur sancte rem sanctam tracta- 
turus, multis verbis docet fidem habendam promissioni 
divinse, qua salutem promittit credentibus et baptizatis. 
Irascitur, et insectatur Ecclesiam, quod Christian! non 
docentur hanc fidem, quasi quisquam sit usquam tarn 
rudis Christianas fidei, ut hoc sit docendus; et tamen 
tanquam rem novam et inauditam ferme Lutherus hoc 
proponit, cum insigni contumelia doctorum omnium. 
Sed hoc non est ei novum in rebus notis, tanquam novis, 

Qui postquam hanc fidem verbis multis ostendit, 
deinde fidei divitias in hoc extollit, ut nos reddat 
pauperes bonorum operum, sine quibus, ut beatus 
Jacobus ait, "fides omnino mortua est." At Lutherus 
sic fidem nobis commendat, ut non solum permittat 

300 Of Baptism 

But Luther so much commends Faith to us, as not only 
to permit us to abstain from good Works ; but also en 
courages us to commit any Kind of Action, how bad 
soever: Tor (says he) you see now how rich the bap 
tized Man is, who cannot lose his Salvation, though will 
ing to do it, by any Sin whatsoever, except Infidelity: 
For no Sins can damn him, but only Incredulity. O 
most impious Doctrine, and Mistress of all Impiety ! so 
hateful in itself to pious Ears, that there is no need to 
confute it : Adultery will not damn then ! Murder will 
not damn ! Perjury will not damn ! Is not Parricide 
damnable neither, if every one believe that he shall be 
saved, through the Virtue of the Promise alone in Bap 
tism? For this he openly asserts; nor do the Words, 
which he presently adds, correct this Sentence in any 
wise; but rather add to the Force of it: For he saith, 
That all other Things, if Faith return, or stand in the 
divine Promise made by the Baptized, are swallowed in 
a Moment in the same Faith; rather by the Truth of 
God, for he cannot deny himself, if you confess him, 
and stick faithfully to his Promise : By which Words, 
what else does he say, but what he has said before, that, 
Infidelity excepted, all other Crimes are in a Moment 
swallowed up by Faith alone; if you confess Christ, 
and stick faithfully to his Promise; that is, if you 
firmly believe that you are to be saved by Faith, what 
soever you do notwithstanding. And that you may the 
less doubt what he aims at, Contrition (says he) and 
Confession of Sins, as also Satisfaction, and all these 
human Inventions, will forsake you, and leave you the 
more unhappy, if you busy yourselves with them, for 
getting this divine Truth. What Truth Pray ? This 
that no Sins can damn thee, but Infidelity only/ What 
Christian Ears can with Patience hear the pestilen- 
tious Hissing of this Serpent, by which he extols Bap- 

De Sacramento Baptismi 301 

nobis vacationem ab operibus bonis, sed etiam suggerat 
audaciam qualiumcumque facinorum. Ait enim: "Jam 
vides quam dives sit homo Christianus, sive baptizatus, 
qui etiam volens non potest perdere salutem suam quan- 
tiscumque peccatis, nisi nolit credere. Null a enim 
peccata eum possunt damnare, nisi sola incredulitas." 
O vocem impiam, et omnis impietatis magistram, ita per 
se exosam piis auribus, ut non sit opus earn redarguere ! 
Ergo non damnabit adulterium? non damnabit homi- 
cidium? non perjurium? non parricidium? si tantum 
credat se quisquam salvandum fore per virtutem 
promissionis in Baptismate? Nam hoc dicit apertis- 
sime, neque quicquam corrigunt hanc sententiam verba 
quge statim subjungit; imo verius augent. Ait enim: 
"Csetera omnia, si redeat vel stet fides in promissionem 
divinam baptizato factam, in momento absorbentur per 
eamdem fidem, imo veritatem Dei, quia seipsum negare 
non potest, si tu eum confessus fueris, et promittenti 
fideliter adhseseris. 7 Quibus verbis, quid aliud dicit, 
quam quod dixit prius ? si absit incredulitas, csetera 
flagitia omnia in momento absorberi in sola fide si con 
fessus fueris Christum, et ejus promissioni fideliter 
adhseseris, hoc est firmiter credideris te salvandum per 
fidem, quicquid feceris. Et quo minus dubites quo 
tendat: "Contritio," inquit, a et peccatorum Confessio, 
deinde et Satisfactio, et omnia ilia hominum excogitata 
studia subito te deserent, et infeliciorem reddent, si in 
ipsis tete distenderis, oblitus veritatis hujus divinse." 
Cujus veritatis 2 nempe hujus, quod nulla peccata pos 
sunt te damnare, nisi sola incredulitas. 

Quse Christianas ferent aures pestilens hoc serpentis 
sibilum, quo Baptismum non in aliud levat, quam ut 
premat Poenitentiam, et Baptismatis gratiam statuat 

302 Of Baptism 

tism, for no other End, but to depress Penance, and 
establish the Grace of Baptism for a free Liberty of 
Sinning? Contrary to which, is that Sentence of St. 
Hierom, which says, that Penance is the Table after 
Ship-wreck: But this agrees not with Luther; for he 
denies Sin to be the Ship-wreck of Faith, and disputes 
it, as if that only Word should totally destroy all the 
Strength of Faith. But beside Luther, who is ignorant 
that a Sinner not only Is not saved by the only Faith 
of Baptism, but also that the Baptism will add to his 
Damnation ? And indeed deservedly ; because he has 
offended God, from whom he had the whole Grace of 
Baptism, and God exacts the more from him to whom 
he has given the more: Therefore since Faith becomes 
dead by wicked Works, why can it not be said, that he 
suffers Ship-wreck who falls from the Grace of God, 
into the Hands of the Devil ? From which, without 
Penance, he cannot escape, or be renewed to such a 
Condition that Baptism may be profitable to him. Has 
St. Hierom written wickedly in this ? Does the whole 
Church follow an impious Opinion, for not believing 
Luther, that Christians are safe enough by Faith alone, 
in the midst of their Sins, without Penance? More 
over, he is so taken up with the Faith of the Sacrament, 
that he cares not much for the Form of Words ; though, 
nevertheless, the Word, by which the Water is signified, 
ought to be of no less Moment, than the Water itself; 
in which, if he thinks that any Care is to be taken, that 
it may be pure and elementary; ought not some true 
Form also be carefully instituted, and used, as is ap 
proved, and now observed in the Church, and was for 
merly in Use amongst the Antients ? 

After this, he so magnifies Faith, that he seems al 
most to intimate, that Faith alone is sufficient without 
the Sacrament. For in the mean While, he deprives 

De Sacramento Baptismi 303 

impune peccandi licentiam? In quam sententiam et 
istud facit, quod ei non placet illud beati Hieronymi 
Poenitentiam esse secundam tabulam post naufragium; 
negat peccatum fidei esse naufragium, et sic disputat, 
tanquam illud verbum prorsus interimat omne robur 
fidei. At quis neseit, nisi Lutherus, peccatorem non 
solum non salvari per solam fidem Baptismi, sed etiam 
ilium ipsum Baptismum ei cessurum in cumulum 
damnationis ? Et merito quia Isesit Deum, a quo totani 
acceperat Baptismi gratiam, et cui plus a Deo datur, ab 
illo vicissim plus exigitur. Igitur, quum fidem per 
opera mala peremerit, cur dici non potest fecisse 
naufragium, qui e Dei gratia decidit in manus dse- 
monum, e quibus absque Poenitentia non reponitur in 
eum statum, ut Baptismum ei rursus prodesse possit? 
E~um hie impie scripsit Hieronymus ? E"um impie tota 
sensit Ecclesia, quse non credit Luthero, sine Posni- 
tentia, per solam fidem Christianos esse tutos in mediis 
sceleribus ? 

Prseterea sic totus est in fide sacramenti, ut non ad- 
modum curet de forma verborum, quum verbum tamen 
per quod significatur aqua, non minoris esse momenti 
debeat quam aqua ipsa, in qua, si putat ullam adhiben- 
dam esse curam, ut pura sit et elementaris, nullam-ne 
decet adhiberi ad inquirendam et exercendam veram ali- 
quam verboruin formam, quam certum sit et nunc 
observari per Ecclesiam, et olhn in usu fuisse 

Post haec ita magnificat fidem, ut propemodum videa- 
tur innuere solam fidem sine sacramento sufficere. Nam 
interim sacramentum privat gratia ; dicit sacramentuni 

304 Of Baptism 

the Sacrament of Grace; he says, that the Sacrament 
it self profits nothing ; 7 denies that the Sacraments con 
fer any Grace ; or that they are effectual Signs of Grace ; 
or that the Sacraments of the Evangelical Law differ in 
any Kind from those of the Mosaical Law, as touching 
the Efficacy of Grace : Which Matter I shall not much 
dispute : But yet, it seems to me, that as all Things were 
but Figures with the Jews, (the Truth of which we have 
in the Christian Law) it may not be absurd to believe, 
that the Sacraments which the Church uses, do so far 
excel those of the Synagogues, as the new Law surpasses 
the old ; that is, as much as the Body is more excellent 
than the Shadow: Nor am I the first, or only Man of 
this Opinion. For Hugo de Sancto Victore, whom 
none esteems other than a good and learned Man, has 
spoken thus; We say, that all Sacraments are certain 
Signs, and spiritual Graces which by them are con 
ferred. Moreover, that the Signs of spiritual Graces, 
according to the Process of Time, ought to be framed 
more evident and plain, that the Knowledge of Truth 
might increase with the Effect of Salvation. 7 And a 
little further, Because Circumcision could only lop off 
exterior Enormities, but not cleanse the inward Eilth 
of Pollutions, a washing Font of Water succeeded Cir 
cumcision, which purgeth the whole, that perfect Jus 
tice may be signified. I hope no body will deny, that 
this Doctor is of Opinion, That the Sacrament of Bap 
tism cleanses internally, and more efficaciously signifies 
perfect Justice, than ever Circumcision did. In which 
Matter Luther takes Notice of two Opinions, and re 
futes both: The first is, Of many who have supposed 
some secret and hidden Virtue to be in the Word and 
Water, which should work the Grace of God in the Soul 
of the Baptized : The other is, Of those who attribute 
no Virtue to the Sacraments, but were of Opinion, That 

De Sacramento Baptismi 305 

ipsum nihil prodesse; negat sacramenta gratiam con- 
ferre, aut gratiae efficacia signa esse, aut omnino quoad 
efficaciam significations, sacramenta legis evangelicse 
differre quicquam a sacramentis legis mosaicse. Qua 
in re non multum disputabo, sed tamen videtur mihi, 
quum omnia in figuris contigerint Judseis, quarum 
veritas est in lege Christiana, nihil absurd! consecu- 
turum, si quis credat sacramenta, quibus utitur Ec- 
clesia, tantum prsecellere synagogse sacramentis, quan 
tum lex nova veterem legem autecellit, hoc est, quantum 
corpus umbram superat. Quod ego tamen neque primus 
cogito, neque solus. Hugo de Sancto-Victore, quern 
nemo non habet et pro viro docto et bono: "Dicimus," 
inquit, "sacramenta omnia signa esse qusedam ejus, quse 
per ilia datur, gratise spiritualis. Oportere autem, ut 
secundum processum temporum, spiritualium gratia- 
rum signa magis ac magis semper evidentia ac declara- 
tiva formarentur, ut cum effectu salutis cresceret cogni- 
tio veritatis." Et Paulo post: "Quia Circumcisio eas 
tantum, quaa foris sunt, enormitates amputare potest, 
eas vero, quse intrinsecus sunt, pollutionum sordes mun- 
dare non potest, venit post Circumcisionem lavacrum 
aquae, totum purgans, ut penecta justitia significare- 
tur." Nemo negabit, opinor, hunc saltern Doctorem 
sentire sacramentum Baptismi et interius purgare, et 
efficacius perfectam significasse justitiam, quam fecerit 

Qua in re Lutherus duas vias commemorat, et utram- 
que refutat, alteram, qua arbitrati sunt plurimi esse 
aliquam virtutem occultam, spiritalem in verbo et aqua, 
quse operetur in animo recipientis gratiam Dei ; alteram 
eorum qui nihil virtutis tribuerunt sacramentis, sed 
gratiam censuerunt a solo Deo dari, qui assistit ex pacto 
sacramentis a se institutis : sed quoniam utrique in hoc 

306 Of Baptism 

Grace was conferred by God alone, who, according to his 
Covenant, is present to the Sacraments instituted by 
himself. 7 But because all agree in this, That Sacra 
ments are efficacious Signs of Grace, Luther rejects the 
one as well as the other : For my Part, as I do not know 
which of the Opinions is the truest, so neither dare I 
be so bold as to contemn either of them. For that very 
Opinion which now is the less assented to, to wit, That 
the Water, by Virtue of the Word, has an occult Power 
of purging the Soul ; seems not to be altogether absurd. 
For if we believe, that Fire has any Influence over the 
Soul, either to punish or purge Sins ; what hinders, that 
Water should, by the Power of God, (by whom also the 
other Thing is done) penetrate to wash away the Un- 
cleanness of the Soul ? Which Opinion seems to be 
much confirmed by the Words of St. Augustine, when 
he says, The Water of Baptism toucheth the Body, and 
washes the Heart ; ? and also that of St. Beda, who says, 
That Christ, by the Touch of his most pure Flesh, has 
given the Water a regenerate Power. Likewise that of 
the Prophet EzeJciel seems to incline towards this, I 
washed thee with Water, and cleansed thy Blood from 
thee : * Which Words, though they were spoken in Times 
past, before Baptism was instituted, are, notwithstand 
ing, (according to the Custom of the Prophets) under 
stood of the future. Neither speaks he only of the wash 
ing of the Body, in which nothing is worthy the Prse- 
dication of a Prophet ; nor was ever any other Washing 
which washed the Crimes of the Soul, but the Sacra 
ment of Baptism, of which Ezekiel seems to have spoken 
in the Person of God ; prophesying, that there should be 
a future Cleansing in the Sacrament of Baptism, by the 
washing Font of Water: Which, by the same Prophet 
is more plain a little after, when he speaks of the future ; 
*Ezech. xvi. 9. 

De Sacramento Baptismi 307 

consentiunt sacramenta esse efficacia signa gratis, 
utramque viam rejicit Lutherus. Ego ut nescio utra via 
sit verier, ita neutram audeo plane contemnere. 

Nam et ilia ipsa via, cui nunc pauciores assentiunt, 
non omnino videtur absurda, quod aqua ipsa per verbum 
occultam habeat animae purgandse potentiam. jN"am si 
creditur ignis in animam agere, vel ad punienda, vel ad 
expurganda peccata, quid vetat potestate Dei, per quam 
et illud fit, aquam quoque ad eluendas animse sordes 
posse penetrare. In quam sententiam videntur et 
Augustini verba f acere, quum ait : "Aqua Baptismi cor 
pus tangit, et cor abluit." Et illud Bedse quoque 
dicentis, quod Christus tactu mundissimse carnis suse 
vim regenerativam contulit aquis. Prseterea videtur 
illud in idem vergere quod propheta canit Ezechiel: 
"Lavi te aqua, et emundavi sanguinem tuum ex te." 
Quae verba, quanquam de prseterito loquitur ante Bap- 
tismum institutum, tamen, ut nios est prophetarum, de 
future intelliguntur ; nee de corpore duntaxat abluendo 
loquitur, in quo nihil est dignum quod propheta prge- 
diceret, nee alia ablutio unquam abluit animae crimina, 
praeter sacramentum Baptismi: de illo igitur locutus 
videtur Ezechiel in persona Dei prsedicentis in sacra- 
mento Baptismi mundationem futuram esse per aquae 
lavacrum. Quod ipsum paulo post idem propheta 
prosequitur apertius per verbum de futuro: "Effun- 
dam" inquit, "super vos aquam mundam, et munddbir 
mini ab omnibus inquinamentis vestris." Annon per 
aquam promittit emundatioiiem ? Quanquam multo 
adhuc apertius rem videtur ostendere Zacharias : ff Exi- 
bunt" inquit, f aquce vivce de Jerusalem, medium earum 
ad mare orientate, et medium earum ad mare novissi- 

308 Of Baptism 

<I will pour out, saith he, clear Water upon you, and I 
will cleanse you from all your Iniquities. * Whether 
does he not here promise a Cleansing by Water ? Yet 
Zecharias seems to unfold the Matter more apparently, 
when he says, Living Water shall flow out from Jeru 
salem, the one Half to the Eastern Sea, and the other 
Half to the great Sea. f Does not this Discourse mani 
fest unto us the Figure of Baptism, viz. Water flowing 
from the Church, which should purge both original and 
actual Sin ? which he does not call dead, but living ; that 
he might demonstrate, as I suppose, That, by the secret 
Sanctification of God, the Force of spiritual Life is 
infused into a corporeal Element. Although I do not 
presume to judge, (as I have said already,) nor am I 
curious, after what Manner God infuses Grace by the 
Sacraments, because his Ways are inscrutable 4 Yet I 
believe, that by one Way or other, this Water should not 
be idle, where he fore-tells so many, and so great 
Things, were to be done by Water; especially, since 
Water, Salt, and other corporeal Things, do receive 
spiritual Force, by the Word of God, without the Sacra 
ment of Faith ; unless all those Things should be spoken 
in vain ; in which Lights, Fire, Water, Salt, Bread, the 
Altar, Vestments, and Kings, are either adjured by Ex 
orcisms, or blessed by the Invocation of Grace. 

If those Things, I say, receive any Virtue or Pres 
ence of the Divinity, without the Sacrament ; how much 
more credible is it, that the Water flowing from Christ s 
Side, does infuse a spiritual Power of Life into the 
Fountain of Regeneration ? Of which Christ himself 
says, That lie, who is not born again of Water, and of 
the Holy Ghost, shall not enter into the Kingdom of 
Heaven ; to which (as the Apostle saith) we are called 

*Ezech. xxxvi. 25. JRom. xi. 33. 

j-Zach. xiv. 8. John iii. 5. 

De Sacramento Baptismi 309 

mum." Hie sermo annon nobis evidenter Baptisma 
depingit? aquam videlicet de Ecclesia manantem, quse 
et originale peccatum purget, et actuale, quam non mor- 
tuam appellat, sed vivam, ut ostendat, opinor, per oc- 
cultam sanctificationem Dei, elemento corporeo vim 
vitse spiritualis infusam. 

Quanquam, ut dixi, qua via Deus per sacrament a in- 
fundat gratiam, neque mihi judicium arrogo, neque 
valde vestigo, quum sint investigabiles vise ejus; sed 
certe aliqua via credo fecisse Deum, ut illic aqua non sit 
otiosa, ubi tam multa et tarn magna prssdicat facienda 
per aquam, prsesertim quum et aqua, et sal, et alia 
quoque corporea, sine sacramento fidei, per verbum Dei 
recipiant spiritalem vim : nisi prorsus vana sint omnia 
quibus cerei, ignis, aqua, sal, panis, altare, vestes, an- 
nuli, vel adjurantur exorcismis, vel invocatione gratise 
benedicuntur. QUJB si vim ullam recipiunt, aut ullam 
numinis prsesentiam extra sacramentum, quanto magis 
credibile est aquam e Christi latere manantem, spirita 
lem vitse vim fonti regenerationis infundere ? De quo 
Christus ipse pronunciat, quod nisi quis renatus fuerit 
ex aqua et Spiritu sancto, non poterit videre regnum 
Dei, ad quod, ut ait Apostolus, ff vocamur in Bap- 

310 Of Baptism 

in Baptism* In which Baptism, I am not against 
Luther, for having attributed so much to Faith: But, 
on the other Side, I would not have him attribute so 
much thereto, as by it to defend an evil Life, or exter 
minate the Sacraments, which it ought to form. But 
when he requires that certain and indubitable Faith in 
the Receiver of the Sacraments; for my Part, I think 
it is rather to be wished for, than exacted. For I do 
not doubt, but when St. Peter did exhort the People 
after this Manner, Do Penance, and be baptized every 
one of you, in the Name of Jesus Christ ; and receive 
you the Gift of the Holy Ghost unto the Remission of 
Sins/f I doubt not but he was ready to receive all the 
People to Baptism ; yet not so suddenly to have exacted 
that high, certain and indubitable Faith of Luther from 
them, which none would have been able to have known 
himself to have attained to : But he promised Remission 
of Sins, and Grace from the Sacrament itself, to all 
those who should but only present themselves, and desire 
it : For an undoubted and certain Faith, is a very great 
Thing, which happens not always, nor to every Body; 
no, not perhaps to them who do not doubt but they have 
it. I indeed shall not doubt to hope, but the Benignity 
of God assists in his Sacraments, and by Means of visi 
ble Signs, infuses invisible Grace ; and helps the Tepid 
ity of Believers, by the Fervour of his Sacraments: 
That many obtain Salvation by the Sacraments, who 
can promise no more to themselves of their Faith, than 
he could, who said, Lord I believe, help my Unbelief. :}: 
In which Thing if any, beside my Adversary, think I 
attribute too much to the Sacrament; let him know, I 
define Nothing, I appoint Nothing, in any Case, which 
may be prejudicial to Faith, from which I derogate 
Nothing : But as I do not think, that Faith alone, with- 
*1. Cor. i. f Acts ii. 38. JMk. i x . 23. 

De Sacramento Baptismi 311 

Quo in Baptismo, quod Lutherus multuin tribuit 
fidei, non adversor, modo ne tantum tribuat fidei, ut 
fides malam vitam defendat, aut, quse formare debet, 
exterminet sacramenta. At quum certain illam et in- 
dubitatam fidem exigit in suscipiente sacramentum, ego 
potius optandam quam exigendam puto. Nam et beatus 
Petrus, quum ita populum hortaretur: "Pcenitentiam 
agite, et baptizetur unusquisque vestrum in nomine Jesu 
Christi in remissionem peccatorum vestrorum, et ac- 
cipietis donum Spiritus sancti" non dubito quin paratus 
fuerit ad Baptismum recipere totum populum; nee 
tamen a toto populo repente exegisset illam summam 
certam et indubitatam fidem Lutheri, quam nemo se 
satis sciret attigisse ; sed promittebat ex ipso sacramento 
omnibus qui se duntaxat offerrent, et cuperent, remis 
sionem peccatorum, et gratiam. Nam magna qusedam 
res est, certa et indubitata fides, neque semper, neque 
cuique contingit, etiam ex his fortasse, qui sibi con- 
tigisse non dubitant. Ego profecto sperare non dubitem, 
quin Dei benignitas suis sacramentis assistat, et visi- 
bilibus signis invisibilem infundat gratiam, et sacra- 
menti sui fervore teporem credentium adjuvet, multos 
per sacramenta consequi salutem, qui de sua fide non 
amplius polliceri possunt, quam potuit ille, qui dixit: 
"Credo, Domine, adjuva incredulitatem meam." 

Qua in re, si cui alii prseterquam adversario, videar 
nimium sacramento tribuere, sciat me nihil definire, 
nihil omnino statuere, quod prsejudicet fidei, cui ego 
nihil derogo; sed ut solam fidem sine sacramento non 
puto sufncere in eo qui sacramenti compos esse potest, ita 
neque sacramentum sufficere sine fide, sed utrumque 

312 Of Baptism 

out the Sacrament, is sufficient for him who may receive 
it; so neither can the Sacrament suffice him without 
Faith; but that both ought to concur and co-operate 
with their Power: And I think it more safe to allow 
Something to the Sacrament, than, like Luther, to at 
tribute so much to Faith, as to leave neither Grace, nor 
the Efficacy of a Sign to the Sacrament. 

Besides, he makes Faith nothing else but a Cloak for 
a wicked Life, as we have before more fully declared: 
And that this may the more appear, after he has de 
prived the Sacraments of Grace, he robs the Church of 
all Vows and Laws ; nor does it at all move him, that 
God said, Vow, and render to God your Vows.* But 
as for Vows, I make no Doubt but some of those, whom 
he calls Vovists and Votaries, will undertake to make 
Answer for their own Profession : For at once, he turns 
them almost all together, out of the Church. 

Xawe of IRulcrs Bre tCo JBe 
BUT, as for the Laws, I admire, that he could, for 
Shame, invent such ridiculous Things ; as if Christians 
could not sin ; but that so great a Multitude of Believers 
should be so perfect, that nothing needed to be ordered, 
either for the Honour of God, or the avoiding of Wicked 
ness. But by the same Work and Policy he robs Priiices 
and Prelates, of all Power and Authority; for what 
shall a King or a Prelate do, if he cannot appoint any 
Law-, or execute the Law which was before appointed ; 
but, even like a Ship without a Rudder, suffer his Peo 
ple to float without Land ? Where then is that Saying 
of the Apostle, Let every Creature be subject to the 
higher Powers ? f Where is that other of his, If thou 
dost Evil, fear the King, it is not without Reason that 
he carries the Sword ? ? f Where is also that, be obedi- 
*Ps. Ixxv. 12 ; Eccles. v. 3. ^Hom. xiii. 1. {Rom. xiii. 4. 

De Sacramento Baptismi 313 

oportere concurrere, et utriusque robur cooperari, et 
tutius opinor aliquid sacramento concedere, quam tan- 
turn dare fidei, quantum donat Lutherus, qui sacramento 
neque gratiam relinquit, neque efficaciam signi. 

Prseterea fidem ipsam nihil facit aliud, quam flagiti- 
osse vita? patrocinium, quemadmodum ante uberius de- 
claravimus. Quam rem quo magis adstrueret, postquam 
sacramenta privavit gratia, Ecclesiam privat et votis 
omnibus, et legibus. Nee quicquam movet ilium, quod 
Deus ait, "Vovete, et reddite" Sed de votis non dubito 
quin exsurgant ex his quos ille vovistas vocat, et votarios, 
qui pro sua professione respondeant. Nam rllos ex 
Ecclesia semel ferme prorsus eliminat universes. 

3Le0fbus dfcagfstratuum be&ten&um Base 

DE legibus vero, demiror hominem prse pudore 
potuisse tarn absurda cogitare, quasi Christiani peccare 
non possent, sed tarn perfecta foret tanta multitudo cre- 
dentium, ut nihil decerni debeat, vel ad cultum Dei, vel 
ad vitanda flagitia. Sed eadem opera, et eadem pru- 
dentia, tollit omnem potestatem et auctoritatem prin- 
cipum, et prselatorum. Nam quid faciet rex, aut prse- 
latus, si neque legem potest ponere, neque positam 
exsequi, sed populus absque lege, velut navis absque 
gubernaculo fluctuet ? Ubi est ergo illud Apostoli : 
"Omnis creatura potestatibus sublimioribus subjecta 
sit?" Ubi illud: ef Si male agis, regem time, non sine 
causa gladium portat?" Ubi illud: "Obedite prcepositis 
vestris, sive regi quasi prcecellenti" et quse sequuntur? 
Cur igitur ait Paulus : "Bona est lex ?" Et alibi : "Lex 
est vinculum perfectionist" Prseterea, cur ait Augus- 

314 Of Baptism 

ent to your Governours, whether to the King as excel 
ling? * And what follows? Why then does St. Paul 
say, The Law is good? f and in another Place, The 
Law is the Bond of Perfection ? :f 

Furthermore, why does St. Augustin say, The Power 
of the King, the Right of the Owner, the Instruments 
of the Executioner, the Arms of the Soldier, the Disci 
pline of the Governor, and the Severity of a good 
Father, were not instituted in vain ? The first have all 
their Customs, Causes, Reasons, Profits; and when the 
others are feared, evil Men are restrained from doing 
Evil, and the Good live quietly amongst the Wicked: 

But I forbear to speak of Kings, lest I should seem to 
plead my own Case. I only ask this, That if none, 
either Man or Angel, can appoint any Law among 
Christians, why does the Apostle institute for us so 
many Laws; as for electing Bishops ; for Widows;) 
covering the Heads of Women, Tf &c. ? Why has he or 
dained that a Christian Woman should not forsake her 
Husband, though an Infidel, if she be not by him first 
abandoned ? JH Why dares he say, I myself speak to the 
rest, not the Lord? -\-\- Why has he exercised so great 
Power, as to command the Incestuous to be delivered 
over to Satan, to the Destruction of the Flesh ?JJ Why 
has St. Peter strucken Ananias and Saphira his Wife 
with the like Punishment, for reserving to themselves 
a little of their own Moneys ? If the Apostles did, of 
themselves, beside the especial Command of our Lord, 
appoint so many Things to be observed by Christians, 
why may not those who succeed them, do the same for 
the Good of the People ? St. Ambrose, Bishop of 

*Hebr. xiii. 17. \I. Cor. xi. 5 fol. 

fl. Tim. i. 8; Prov. xiii. 14. **I. Cor. vii. 12, 13. 

IColos. iii. 14. ffl. Cor. vii. 12. 

1. Tim. iii. ; Tit. i. 7. til. Cor. v. 4, 5. 

fl. Tim. v. 3 fol. Acts v. 

De Sacramento Baptismi 315 

tinus: "Non frustra sunt instituta potestas regis, et 
cognitoris jus, ungula carnificis, arma militis, disciplina 
dominantis, severitas etiam boni patris ? Habent omnia 
ista modos suos, causas suas, rationes, utilitates, et hsec, 
quum timentur, et mail coercentur, et boni quieti inter 
malos vivunt." 

Sed de regibus dicere supersedeo, ne videar meam 
causam agere. Istud quaere, si nemo, nee homo, nee an- 
gelus potest super hominem Christianum legem ponere, 
cur tot leges ponit Apostolus, et de legendis episcopis, 
et de viduis, et velandis foeminarum capitibus? cur 
statuit ne fidelis conjux ab infideli discedat, nisi desera- 
tur ? Cur audet dicere : "Cceteris dico ego, non Domi- 
nus ?" Cur exercuit tantam potestatem, ut f ornicarium 
Satanse juberet tradi in interitum carnis ? Cur Petrus 
Ananiam et Saphiram simili poena percussit, quod e sua 
ipsorum pecunia paulum reservassent sibi ? Si multa 
statuebant apostoli, prseter speciale prseceptum Domini, 
super Christianum populum, cur non idem propter po- 
puli commodum faciant hi, qui successerunt in aposto- 
lorum locum ? Ambrosius Mediolanensis episcopus, vir 
sanctus, et nihil arrogans, jubere non dubitavit ut per 
suam diocesim conjuges in quadragesima conjugalibus 
abstinerent amplexibus, et indignatur Lutherus, si Ro- 
manus Pontifex, successor Petri, vicarius Christi, cui 
Christus velut apostolorum principi tradidisse creditur 
claves Ecclesiae, ut cseteri per ilium et intrarent, et 
pellerentur, jejunium indicat aut preculas ? Nam quod 
suadet, corpore parendum esse, animo retinendam liber- 

316 Of Baptism 

Millan, a holy Man, (not arrogant) has scrupled, in 
commanding that married Persons, through his whole 
Diocese, should abstain from their lawful Pleasures, 
during the whole Time of Lent. And does Luther take 
it so heinously that the Pope of Rome, Successor of St. 
Peter, Christ s Vicar, (to whom, as to the Prince of the 
Apostles, it is believed that Christ gave the Keys of the 
Church, that by him the rest should enter, or be kept 
out) should institute a Fast or Prayers? As for his 
persuading Men to obey outwardly in Body, but yet to 
retain to themselves their Liberty in Mind, who is so 
blind as not to see his Shifts and Quirks ? Why carries 
this simple Man, this Hypocrite, both Water and Fire ? 
Why does he (as it were in the Words of the Apostle) 
command not to serve Men, not to be subject to the 
Statutes of Men;* 1 and yet, notwithstanding, command 
to shew Obedience to the unjust Tyranny of the Pope ? 
Does the Apostle preach after this Manner? Kings 
have no Right over you, yet suffer you an unjust Em 
pire. Masters have no Right of Power over you, yet 
suffer an unjust Servitude. If Luther is of Opinion, 
that People ought not to obey; why does he say they 
must obey ? If he thinks they ought to obey, why is not 
he himself obedient ? Why does this Quack juggle 
thus ? Why does he thus reproachfully raise himself 
against the Bishop of Rome, whom he says we ought to 
obey? Why raises he this Tumult? Why excites he 
the People against him, whose Tyranny, (as he calls it) 
he says is to be endured ? Indeed I believe, it is for no 
other End, than to procure to himself the good Esteem 
of such Malefactors as desire to escape the Punishment 
due to their Crimes ; that so they might choose him for 
their Head, who now fights for their Liberty; and de 
molish Christ s Church, so long founded upon a firm 
*I. Cor. vii. 23. 

De Sacramento Baptismi 317 

tatem, quis tarn csecus est, ut strophas istas non videat ? 
Cur ignem gerit et aquam homo simplex et sanctulus ? 
Cur jubet velut Apostoli verbis hominum servos non 
fieri, hominum statutis non subjici, et tamen parere 
jubet Pontificis injustse tyrannidi ! An Apostolus hoc 
pacto prsedicat : Reges nihll juris habent in vos ; injus- 
tum f eratis imperium ? Domini jus non habent in vos ; 
feratis injustam servitutem? Si Lutherus parendum 
esse non putet, cur parendum dicit? Si parendum 
censet, cur ipse non paret ? Cur homo versipellis talibus 
ludit technis ? Cur in PontifLcem, cui dicit obediendum 
esse, convitiis insurgit ? Cur tumultum suscitat ? Cur 
in ilium concitat populos, cujus vel tyrannidem, ut 
vocat, fatetur esse ferendam? Profecto non ob aliud, 
opinor, quam ut f avorem sibi conciliet improborum, qui 
suorum scelerum impunitatem cuperent, et eum, qui pro 
libertate eorum jam decertat, caput ipsis instituerent, et 
Ecclesiam Christi tamdiu super firmani petram funda- 
tam demolirentur, et Ecclesiam novam ex improbis et 
flagitiosis connatam erigerent contra quam clamat 
propheta : "Odivi Ecclesiam malignantium, et cum im- 
piis non sedebo" et una cum illo nostra clamet Ecclesia : 
"Dirige me in veritate tua, quia tu es Deus salvator 
meus, et te sustinui tota die." 

318 Of the Sacrament of Penance 

Rock ; erecting to themselves a new Church, compacted 
of flagitious and impious Persons, contrary to that Ex 
clamation of the Prophet, I will have abhorred the 
Church of Evil-doers, and I not sit with the Impious:* 
Direct me in thy Truth; for thou art God my Saviour, 
and thee have I sustained all the Day long.^ 


f tbe Sacrament of penance 

IT troubles me exceedingly to hear how absurd, how 
impious, and how contradictory to themselves the Trifles 
and Babbles are, wherewith Luther bespatters the Sac 
rament of Penance. First, after his old Custom, he 
proposes for a new Thing, what is by every Body com 
monly known, viz. That we ought to believe the Promise 
of God, whereby he promiseth to those who repent, Re 
mission of Sins: And then he cries out reproachfully 
against the Church, for not teaching this Faith. Who 
I pray you, exhorts any one to the Penance of Judas; 
that is, to be sorry for what he has committed, and not 
expect Pardon ? Who should tell us, that we ought to 
pray for Remission of Sins, if he did not teach Pardon 
to be promised to the Penitent? What is more fre 
quently preached than the Clemency of Almighty God, 
which is so great, that he mercifully extends it to all 
Persons who are willing to reform their wicked Lives ? 
Did no Body, beside Luther, ever read, That at what 
Time soever a Sinner repents of his Sins, he shall be 
saved?$ Has none ever read, that the Adulteress was 
dismissed ? That the Prophet was pardoned, who was 

*Ps. xxv. 5. JEzech. xv iii. 27. 

tPs. xxiv. 5. SJohn viii. 3. 

De Sacramento Poenitentice 319 


De Sacramento penitential 

DE Poenitentia poenitet audire quas nugas, quse 
somnia, quam absurda, quam impia, quam sibi repug- 
nantia deblateret. Primum suo more, velut novum 
proponit, quod omnibus est notissimum, fidem haben- 
dam promissioni Dei, qua promisit pcenitenti remis- 
sionem peccatorum; et jam insectatur Ecclesiam, quod 
hanc fidem non doceat. Quis est, obsecro, qui hortatur 
quemquam ad Judse prenitentiam, ut doleat quod com- 
misit, nee tamen speret remissionem? Quis doceret 
orandum pro venia, nisi qui doceret promissam poeni- 
tenti veniam ? Quid prsedicatur saepius, quam Dei tarn 
immensa dementia, ut nulli quantumvis scelerato se 
emendanti claudat misericordiam ? Nemo-ne, prseter 
Lutherum, legit unquam : "Quacumque hora ingemuerit 
peccator, salvus erit?" Nemo legit dimissam adulteram, 
veniam prophetse datam, non adulterii tantum, sed 
homicidii quoque, Paradisum latroni datum, et eo datum 
tempore, quo commissa prius flagitia nulla potuit satis- 
f actione redimere ? Tantum abest ut haec non doceatur 
fiducia consequendse venise, quam prseteritam eese 
clamat Lutherus, ut potius in earn partem nimii sint 
qui populos docent : ita per se libenter in hanc fiduciam 
prsecipites, ut magis in alteram partem sint avocandi, 

320 Of Contrition 

not only guilty of Adultery, but of Murther also?* 
That Paradise was given to the Thief on the Cross ;f 
and at that Time too, when he could not cancel his 
Crimes committed, by any Satisfaction ? They who in 
struct the People, are so far from not teaching them this 
Hope of obtaining Pardon, which Luther cries is past, 
that they rather seem to do it too much; the People 
being so easily inclined to rely upon this Confidence, 
that there is a greater Need of recalling them to the 
other Side; whereby they may contemplate the severe 
and inflexible Justice of God: For there are ten to be 
found, who sin in the too much Confidence of that 
Promise; rather than one who despairs of obtaining 
Pardon. Let Luther then propose that no more for a 
Thing so new, and strange to us, which every Body al 
ready knows. Let him not any longer complain, that 
this is out of Use, than which nothing is more usual. 


f Contrition 

HAVING thus blotted out, (says Luther) the Promise 
and Faith ; let us see what they have substituted in their 
Place. They allotted (says he) three Parts to Penance, 
Contrition, Confession, and Satisfaction/ All which 
three he so handles, that it appears well enough that 
none of them pleaseth him. First of all, he is very 
angry with Contrition, and calls the Anger of God in 
supportable; because Place is given to Attrition, and 
God is believed to supply, by the Sacrament, what is 
wanting to Man in the Sorrow for his Sins, when it is 
less vehement. 

*II. Ks. xii. fLu. xxiii. 43, 

De Contritione 321 

qua contemplentur severam atque inflexibilem Dei 
justitiam. Decuplo enim plures invenies, qui nimia 
peccent istius promissionis fiducia, quam desperatione 
remissionis obtinendae. Desinat ergo Lutberus earn rem 
pro nova nobis et admiranda proponere, quam nemo non 
novit. Desinat quiritari desuetam esse, qua nihil est 


2>e Contritione 

"OBLITEKATIS," inquit, "promissione et fide, vide- 
amus quid substituerunt in locum earum. Tree," 
inquit, "partes dederunt Pcenitentise : Contritionem, 
Confessionem, Satisfactionem." Quas omnes tres ita 
tractat Lutherus, ut satis perspicuum faciat nullam 
earum satis ei placere. ISTam primum in Contritione in- 
dignatur, et iram Dei vocat insustentabilem, quod At- 
tritioni fiat locus, et credatur Deus in dolore non satis 
de se vehementi per sacramentum supplere quod deest 
homini. Videamus ergo quam prseclare tuetur quod 
dicit, quid ipse contra statuat, 

322 Of Contrition 

Let us see how well he maintains what he says ; what 
he brings against himself. He teaches Contrition to be 
a great Thing, not easily had: He commands all Men 
to be certain that they have it ; and to believe undoubted 
ly, that, through the Words of the Promise, all their 
Sins are forgiven them; and that after they are loosed 
by the Word of Man here on Earth, they are absolved 
by God in Heaven. In which Thing, his own Assertion 
will either fall back upon what he has already repre 
hended, or else will appear much more absurd. 

For God has either promised to forgive Sins through 
Penance, to those only, who grieve as much for them as 
the Nature and Greatness of their Sins require, or to 
those who grieve not so much; or, finally, to such as 
are in no wise sorry for their Sins. If he has promised 
Forgiveness only to those, who are as contrite as the 
Greatness of their Crimes requires ; then cannot Luther 
himself, (as he commands all others to be) be assured, 
and out of Doubt, that his Sins are forgiven him. For 
how will he be certain of his obtaining the Promise, 
when he can in no-wise know that he is sufficiently con 
trite for his Sins ? For no mortal Man has ever yet 
known, how great Contrition is required for mortal 
Sin. If God has promised Pardon to such as are less 
contrite, than the Greatness of their Sins requires, then 
has he promised it to such as are called Attrites; and 
by that Luther agrees with those he but now repre 
hended. But if God has promised it to such as have 
no Manner of Sorrow for their Sins, he has surely much 
more promised it to such as are attrite, that is, to such 
as are in some Manner sorry. Wherefore if he admits 
but only Contrition, that is, a sufficient Grief, then can 
no Body be assured, that he is absolved; and Luther s 
certain and undoubted Confidence of Absolution, will 
perish, or be false, and erroneous. 

De Contritione 323 

Magnam rem docet esse Contritionem, nee facile para- 
bilem. Jubet omnes habere pro certo, et indubitate 
credere, propter verbum promissionis, omnia sibi peccata 
esse dimissa, et a Deo se solutos in coelo, postquam per 
os hominis soluti sunt in terra. Qua in re ipsius assertio 
vel in idem recidet, quod reprehendit, vel multo magis 
erit absurda. Nam Deus aut his duntaxat per Pceni- 
tentiam promisit peccata remittere, qui quantum peccati 
moles exigit, ante conteruntur, aut his etiam qui minus, 
aut denique remittit et illis, qui nihil conteruntur om- 
nino. Si non promisit, nisi, quantum poscat peccati 
magnitudo, contritis, non potest Lutherus, quod omnes 
jubet, certus esse, et indubius se esse solutum. Nam 
quomodo scire se potest obtinere promissum, qui se scire 
non potest satis esse contritum ? Nemo enim novit mor- 
talium omnium quantum Contritionis exigat mortale 
peccatum. Quod si veniam promisit Deus parum (pro 
sceleris mole) contritis, tune promisit his, quos isti 
vocant attritos, et jam cum his consentit Lutherus, quos 
reprehendit. At si promisit Deus nihil omnino dolen- 
tibus, magis promisit attritis, hoc est utcumque dolen- 
tibus. Quamobrem, si tantum Contritionem admittit, 
hoc est sufficientem dolorem, nemo certus esse potest se 
esse absolutum, et sic Luthero perierit, aut falsa fuerit 
et erronea absolutionis certa ilia et indubitata fiducia. 

324 Of Contrition 

But if he says, that the Sins of such as do only per 
form a slack, or luke-warm Penance, are not otherwise 
forgiven, than by the Sacrament of Penance; by con 
fessing themselves Sinners, and asking and obtaining 
Pardon by the Mouth of their Brother: What is this 
different from the Opinion of those whom he reproves, 
who say, that Attrition, by Means of the Sacrament of 
Penance, is made Contrition ? For what is wanting to 
Men, is supplyed by the Sacrament; or else Luther s 
Position, that Man must be certain of Absolution, is 
false : Whether he will or no, he must admit, if not the 
Word Attrition, at least the Thing signified by it ; which, 
if he grants, (as he will do, if he fly not from his own 
Opinion;) it is a very unseasonable Trifle of him to 
contend concerning the Word, and to allow the Effect. 
Again ; he sets upon the whole Church with magnificent 
Words; as though it perversely taught Contrition, in 
exhorting us to acquire it by the Collection and Aspect 
of our Sins; when we ought to be first taught, as he 
says, the Beginnings and Causes of Contrition, to wit, 
the immoveable Truth of divine Threatnings and Prom 
ises ; as though such Things were not every where taught 
among the People ; many Passages of Scripture for that 
Opinion being alleged, not less threatning, nor less 
comfortable ; the Causes likewise added to procure Con 
trition ; nor less efficacious, than those which Luther ex 
acts and much more holy. For these Causes do almost 
propose Nothing, but the Fear of Punishment, or the 
Hopes of Reward ; which is a Conversion not so accept 
able to God, as a Conversion caused by Love. That 
may be done, not only by proposing what Luther ad 
vises, viz. God s Threatnings, and Promise of Remis 
sion; but also what they teach, whom Luther derides; 
as if they taught Nothing at all, to wit, the Bounty of 
God towards us, and his exceeding great Benefits con- 

De Contritione 325 

Sin ei dicat, cujus alioqui tepido ac remisso dolori 
peccata non remitterentur, per Pcenitentise sacramen- 
tum remitti omnia, fatenti se peccatorem, et petenti 
veniam, et per os fratris obtinenti, quid dicit aliud quam 
sentiunt illi quos insectatur ? Qui dicunt ex Attritione 
per sacramentum superveniens fieri Contritionem : sac- 
ramentum enim supplere quod deest homini. Aut ergo 
falsa est positio Lutheri, certum esse hominem de ab- 
solutione, aut, velit nolit, admittendum est ei, si non 
verbum Attritionis, certe res quam isti verbo designant ; 
quam si concesserit (concedet autem, nisi velit de sua 
sententia discedere) hominis est intempestive nugantis 
re concessa contendere de vocabulo. 

Rursus magnificis verbis totam invadit Ecclesiam, 
tanquam perverse doceat Contritionem, dum ex pecca- 
torum collectu et conspectu docemur parare Contri 
tionem, quum prius doceri deberemus, ut ait ille, prin- 
cipia et causas Contritionis, nempe divinse commina- 
tionis, et promissionis immobilem veritatem : quasi non 
talia passim dicantur apud populum, prolatis etiam in 
eamdem sententiam locis multis e Scriptura sacra, neque 
minus minacibus, neque minus consolantibus, additis 
pra3terea causis in procurandam Contritionem, neque 
minus emcacibus quam sunt istse, quas Lutherus exigit, 
et longe sanctioribus. Nam hse causse nihil fere pro- 
ponunt, prseter metum poense, et spem prsemii, quse con- 
versio ad Deum non tarn grata est, ac si quis convertatur 
amore, hoc fiet, si non ista quisque tantum proponet 
sibi, quse Lutherus affert, comminationem Dei, et remis- 
sionis promissionem, sed ilia etiam, quae docent hi, quos 
Lutherus tanquam nihil docentes irridet, nempe Dei in 
se benignitatem, et toties in nihil bene merentem, in 
toties merentem male, ampliter collata beneficia. His 

326 Of Confession 

ferred upon us; when, not only undeserving Good, but 
even demeriting Evil. For the Sinner, having consid 
ered these Things, will rather be touched with Sorrow, 
for having offended so pious a Father, than so potent a 
Lord; and will less dread his own Punishment, than 
God s Anger : Neither will he be so desirous of Heaven, 
as of God s Favour: This Consideration of divine 
Bounty formeth Contrition; (Knowest thou, Man,, 
says the Apostle, that the Bounty of God invites thee to 
Penance?)* and, as I have said, forms a more holy Con 
trition, than that which, from the Fear of Punishment, 
and Hopes of Pardon, is formed by Luther; who boasts, 
that no Body teaches Threatnings but himself; when 
all Men do teach them, and better too. 


f Confession 

HE so treats of Confession, as to hold, That in pub 
lic Crimes, where the Sin is known to all People, with 
out Confession, there (where it is less Matter,) Con 
fession is to be made. But, in the Confession of secret 
Sins, he has so uncertain Turnings, that, though he seem 
not altogether to reject it, yet can it not be known by 
him whether he admits it as a Thing commanded, or no : 
For he denies it to be proved by Scripture ; and yet says, 
That it pleases him well, and that it is profitable and 
necessary ; yet he does not say it to be necessary to all ; 
but, as I suppose, only to pacify troubled Consciences ; 
giving it to be understood, that if any Body have a 
Conscience like his own, which should be either safe 
*Rom. ii. 4. 

De Confessione 32 7 

enim rebus sibi a se propositis adducetur peccator, nt 
plus doleat off ensum tarn pium Patrem, quam tarn poten- 
tem Dominum, et minus pcenam suam timeat, quam iram 
Dei, nee tarn coelum cupiat, quam favorem Dei. Hsec 
consideratio bonitatis divinse format Contritionem. 
("An nescis, homo/ inquit Apostolus, "quod Dei be- 
nignitas ad Poenitentiam te invitat?") Et format, ut 
dixi, sanctiorem quam sit hsec quam ex metu poense et 
spe remissionis format Lutherus, qui neminem jactat 
ilia docere, prseter se, quum omnes et eadem doceant, et 


De Confeseione 

CONFESSIONEM ita tractat, ut in publicis criminibus, 
quae sine Confessione nota sunt toti populo, Confes- 
sionem exigat ubi minus est opus. Occultorum vero 
Confessionem ita versat lubricus, ut quum non rejiciat 
prorsus, tamen relinquat incertum, an pro re jussa et 
demandata recipiat. Nam e Scripturis earn negat pro- 
bari ; tamen placere sibi dicit, et utilem esse, ac necessa- 
riam, nee tamen dicit omnibus, sed ad pacandas dun- 
taxat afflictas conscientias : opinor, significans, quod si 
quis habeat conscientiam SUOB similem, quse vel de sua 
sanctitate secura sit, vel de verbo promissionis divinse 
certa sit, ei non sit opus occultorum Confessione. 
Alioqui si quis meticulosus sit, ad pacandam conscien 
tiam confitendum esse. 

328 Of Confession 

for his own Sanctity, or assured of the Word of the 
divine Promise; he need not confess his secret Sins at 
all, otherwise, if any Man be scrupulous, he may con 
fess himself, to quiet his Conscience. Wherefore, see 
ing he has so dubiously suspended his Words, I have 
thought fit to speak something more plainly of the 
Necessity of Confession: And because he denies Con 
fession of secret Sins to be proved by Scripture, I will, 
in the first Place, propose that Passage in Ecclesiasti- 
cus, which seems to many besides me, to comprehend all 
the three Parts of Penance. My Son, (saith he) neg 
lect not thyself in thine Infirmity, but adore our Lord, 
and he will cure thee ; Turn thyself from thy Sins, and 
lift up thine Hand, and cleanse thy Heart from all 
Sin. * For God cures, whilst he looses in Heaven what 
the Priest has loosed on Earth : We lift up our Hands in 
a Satisfaction; we turn from our Sins by Contrition; 
and in Confession, we cleanse our Hearts from Sin; 
according to that Saying of the Prophet, Pour out your 
Hearts before him. f St. Chrysostom also comprehends 
the three Parts of Penance, when he says, Perfect Pen 
ance compels the Sinner to endure all Things willingly ; 
and further he says, Contrition in his Heart, Con 
fession in his Mouth, a perfect Humility in his Works ; 
this is fruitful Penance. This also makes for Con 
fession ; Know the Face of your own Cattle : :(: But how 
can he know it, if it be not shewn him ? What is more 
clear than that in Numbers the fifth, The Lord spoke to 
Moses, saying, speak to the Children of Israel, when a 
Man or Woman has committed a Sin, of all the Sins 
which are wont to happen unto Men; and have through 
Negligence, transgressed the Commandments of our 
Lord, and have sinned; they shall confess their Sins. 

*Ecclus. xxxviii. 9, 10. JProv. xxvii. 23. 

fPs. Ixi. 9. Num. v. 5-7. 

De Confessions 329 

Quamobrem, quoniam tarn dubie verba sua suspendit, 
mihi visum est afferre qusedam, quse de necessitate Con- 
fessionis loquimtur apertius. Et quia ex Scripturis 
haberi negat occultorum Confessionem, primo loco pro- 
ponam eum locum ex Ecclesiastico, qui non soli mihi 
videtur omnes tres Poanitentise partes complecti : "Fill" 
inquit, "in tua infirmitate ne despicias teipsum, sed 
adora Dominum^ et ipse curabit te; averte te a delicto, 
et dirige manus, et ab omni delicto munda cor tuum." 

Curat enim Dens, dum solvit in coelo, quod sacerdos 
solvit in terra ; dirigimus manus in Satisf actione, aver- 
timus a delicto per Contritionem, cor vero a delicto in 
Confessione mundamus, juxta illud prophetse: "Effun- 
dite coram illo corda vestra" Tres Poenitentise partes 
complectitur et Chrysostomus, quum ait: "Perfecta 
Poenitentia cogit peccatorem omnia libenter sufferre." 
Et infra: "In corde ejus Contritio, in ore ejus Con- 
f essio, in opere tota humilitas : hsec est f ructif era Poeni 
tentia." Pro Confessione facit et illud: "Cognosce 
vulium pecoris tui" Quomodo enim potest cognoscere, 
si non indicetur ? Quid eo manifestius, quod legitur 
Numeri capite quinto ? "Locutus est Dominus ad 
Mosen dicens : Loquere ad filios Israel : Vir, sive mulier, 
quum fecerit ex omnibus peccatis., quce solent hominibus 
accidere, et per negligentiam transgressi fuerint man- 
datum Domini, atque deliquerint, confitebuntur pecca- 
tum suum" Hue et illud pertinet, quod in lege veteri 
Judseorum, quibus omnia contingebant in figura, popu- 
lus infectus lepra jussus est se sacerdotibus ostendere. 
Nam si Deus ideo scripsit in lege : "Non alligabis os bovi 

330 Of Confession 

To this also belongs that of the Jewish old Law, which 
had all Things in Figure, the People infected with the 
Leprosy were commanded to shew themselves to the 
Priest. For if God has therefore written in the Law, 
You shall not bind the Mouth of the Oxen that treads 
out the Corn;* that he might admonish us, that it is but 
just, that he that serves at the Altar, should live by the 
Altar, (as the Appostle declares, who says, That this is 
written in the Law, not for the Oxen, but for Men : For 
what Care, saith he, takes God for Oxen?) f There 
is no Reason of Doubt, but that, by this Leprosy of the 
Body in the carnal Law, was signified that of Sin in the 
spiritual Law. And that Christ might bring us to the 
Understanding of this, by Degrees, he said to the Lepers 
which he cleansed, not only from the Leprosy of the 
Body, but also of the Soul; Go shew yourselves to the 
Priest. $ That of St. James also, confess your Sins to 
one another : Though I am not ignorant of the various 
Interpretations given by many to this Place ; yet I am 
of Opinion, and many more besides me, that it is com 
manded of sacramental Confession. Or doth not that 
manifestly confirm Confession which our Lord saith by 
Esais, Declare thou thy Wickedness that thou mayest be 
justified ?\\ If the Authority of the Fathers ought to 
have any Credit, sure it deserves it in this. St. Ambrose 
saith, No Man can be justified from Sin, if he do not 
confess his Sin. 7 What can be more plainly spoken? 
Moreover, St. John Chrysostom says, He cannot receive 
the Grace of God, unless he be cleansed from all his 
Sins, by Confession. 7 Lastly, St. Augustine, Do Pen 
ance, such as is done in the Church ; Let no Man say to 
himself, I do it secretly, because I do it with God : 

*Deut, xxv. 4. Jas. v. 16. 

fl. Cor. ix. 9. flsai. xliii. 26. 

iLu. xvii. 14. 

De Confessione 331 

trtiuranti" ut nos admoneret sequum esse, ut qui altari 
servit, de altari viveret, quemadmodum declarat Apos- 
tolus, qui illud ait in lege scriptum, non propter boves, 
sed propter homines: "Numquid de bobus" inquit, 
ff cura est Deo?" non est cur quisquam dubitet per 
lepram illam corpoream in lege carnali significatam esse 
peccatum in lege spirituali : in quam intelligentiam ut 
nos paulatim duceret Christns, ait leprosis, quos dum 
irent non a corporis tantum, sed ab animse quoque lepra 
mundavit: "He" inquit, "ostendite vos sacerdotibus" 
Jam illud divi Jacobi : "Confttemini alterutrum peccata 
vestra" etiam si non nesciam alios alio trahere, mihi 
certe, nee soli, videtur de sacramentali Confessione man- 
datum. Annon illud quoque facit aperte pro Confes 
sione, quod per Esaiam ait Dominus: "Tu die iniqui- 
tates tuas, ut justificeris?" 

Quod si quid valere debet auctoritas sanctorum 
Patrum, valere debet imprimis quod ait beatus Am- 
brosius : a ]^on potest quisquam justificari a peccato, nisi 
peccatum ipsum fuerit confessus." Quid dici potest 
apertius ? Prseterea Joannes Chrysostomus : a E"on 
potest," inquit, a gratiam Dei accipere, nisi purgatus 
fuerit ab omni peccato per Confessionem." Denique 
beatus Augustinus: a Agite Poenitentiam, qualis agitur 
in Ecclesia. Nemo dicat sibi : Occulte ago, quia apud 
Deum ago. Ergo sine causa dictum est : Quce solveritis 
super terrain? Ergo sine causa claves datse sunt?" 

332 Of Confession 

Therefore, without Reason was it said, What you shall 
loose on Earth:* Therefore without Reason is it that 
the Keys were given. Put the Case, that not one Word 
was particularly, or figuratively read of Confession, nor 
any Thing spoken of it by the holy Fathers ; yet, when 
I consider that all People have discovered their Sins to 
the Priests, for so many Ages ; when I consider the Good 
that continually follows the Practice of it, and no Evil 
at all ; I cannot think, or believe it to be established, or 
upholded by any human Invention, but by the divine 
Order of God. For the People could never, by any 
human Authority, be induced to discover their secret 
Sins, which they abhor in their Consciences, and which 
they are so much concerned to conceal, with such Shame, 
and Confusion, and so undoubtedly to a Man that 
might, when he pleased, betray them. Neither could it 
happen, that among such great Numbers of Priests, 
some good, and some bad, indifferently hearing Confes 
sions, they should all retain them ; and that also, when 
some of them can keep nothing else secret ; if God him 
self, the Author of the Sacrament, did not, by his espe 
cial Grace, defend this so wholesome a Thing. For my 
Part, let Luther say what he will, I will believe that 
Confession was instituted, and is preserved by God him 
self ; not by any Custom of the People, or Institution of 
the Fathers. 

Now Luther s condemning the Reservation of some 
Sins, by which a particular Priest is restrained from 
remitting all ; but that some are not forgiven, but by 
the Hand of a Bishop, some by the Hand of the Pope 
himself; This shews how this popular Man so levels 
all Things, as that, through the Hatred he bears to 
the chief Bishop, he casts all other Bishops into the 
Rank of the lowest Priest; being so blinded with 
*Matt. xviii. 18. 

De Confessions 333 

Verum de Confessione si verbum nullum neque nomi- 
natim, neque in figura legeretur, neque quicquam a 
sanctis Patribus diceretur, tamen quum videam totum 
populum tot sseculis peccata sua patefacere sacerdotibus, 
quum ex ea re tarn assidue videam tantum boni proven- 
tuna, tarn nihil enatum mali, aliud neque credere, neque 
cogitare possem, quam earn rem non humano consilio, 
sed divino plane mandato et constitutam esse, et con- 
servatam. Neque enim ulla humana auctoritate popu- 
lus unquam potuisset adduci, ut occultissima scelera, 
quorum tacitam conscientiam horrebant, quse, ne pro- 
dirent in lueem, tanti referebat ipsorum, in alienas aures 
(qui posset quum vellet prodere) tanto cum pudore, 
tanto cum periculo, tarn incunctanter effunderent. 
Neque fieri potuisse, quum tarn numerosi presbyteri 
boni malique promiscue Confessiones audiant, ut audita 
continerent, etiam hi, qui alias nihil continent, nisi 
Deus ipse, qui sacramentum instituit, rem tarn salubrem 
speciali gratia defenderet. Mihi ergo, quicquid ait Lu- 
therus, non ex aliqua populi consuetudine, nee ex insti- 
tutione Patrum, sed ab ipso Deo videtur instituta et 
praeservata Confessio. 

Jam quod Lutherus reservationes peccatorum damnat, 
per quas interdicitur ne quilibet sacerdos remittat 
omnia, sed qusedam episcopi requirant manum, qusedam 
etiam Papse, istud spectat, quod homo popularis sic ex- 
sequat omnia, ut, summi Pontificis odio, Pontifices 
omnes in classem cogat innmorum sacerdotum: tarn 
caecus odio, ut jurisdictionem non discernat ab Ordine, 
imo vero multo adhuc ca?cior, ut qui nee Ordinem videat 
ullum, sed omnia plane permisceat, et confundat hor- 

334 Of Confession 

Malice, as not to discern Jurisdiction, from Order ; nay, 
so blind, as not to see any Order at all; but mingles 
and confounds all Things with Horror, and reduces 
Priests themselves into the Rank of Lay-men. Seeing 
that God has formed this his Church-militant to the 
Example of the triumphant; why, reading there so 
many Degrees, so many Orders, admits he in this 
neither Degree, nor Order, nor any Difference at all? 
Why then has the Apostle writ so much of Bishops, if a 
Bishop has no more Power over his Flock, than any 
other Priest, nor than a Lay-man ? But we will speak 
of the Laity hereafter; let us now speak of Priests. 
Every Priest indeed has Orders, but not Authority of 
judging, any Thing belonging to him that absolves, be 
fore the Care of some Flock be committed unto him: 
Yet he is thought a fit Person for it before. If the 
Bishop then, who has Care of the whole Diocese, com 
mits any Part of his Care to a Priest ; does not Reason 
teach us, that this Man can bind or loose no more than 
what the other has permitted him, without whose Com 
mand, he could not have bound or loosed any Thing at 
all amongst the People ? for the same Thing is not law 
ful for the Bishop to do in another Diocese. What 
Wonder then, if the Bishop reserves some Things to 
himself, whose Care is greater than what might be com 
mitted to every Person, though not the least learned, 
when it has been for so many Ages observed; fearing 
lest the People should fall more pronely into Sin, when 
the Power of Remission should be proposed to them in so 
easy a Manner? Luther now at last, that no Body, 
through the Difficulty of Penance, should be deterred 
from Sin, commands every Thing to be permitted to 
every Person ; not to Priests only, but also to the Laity : 
Nay, he comes to that Height of Madness, that, though 
Women have commonly that bad Esteem of not being 

De Confessione 335 

rore, sacerdotesque ipsos prorsus in laicorum classem 
redigat. Quum Deus ecclesiam hane militantem ad ex 
emplar triumphantis effinxerit, cur tot gradus, tot 
ordines legens illic, nullum gradum, nullum ordinem, 
nullum prorsus discrimen admittit hie ? Quorsum igitur 
tarn multa scripsit Apostolus de episcopis, si nihil 
juris in gregem suum plus quam sacerdotes reliqui, 
nihil plus quam laicus quivis haberet episcopus 3 
Sed de laicis dicemus postea; interim de sacerdote 

Sacerdos quilibet Ordinem quidem habet, sed auctori- 
tatem judicandi non habet (quse res ad absolventem per- 
tinet) priusquam ei gregis alicujus cura committitur ; 
idoneus tamen ante reputatur, cui cura tuto possit com- 
mitti. Episcopus ergo qui curam habet totius dioecesis, si 
cui sacerdoti partem quampiam suse curse commiserit, an- 
non ipsa ratio docet hunc non ainplius aut ligare posse, aut 
solvere, nisi quatenus ille permiserit, sine cujus mandato 
nihil omnino in illius populo vel ligare quemquam, vel 
solvere potuisset ? Quippe quod nee ipsi liceat episcopo 
in aliena dicecesi. Quid ergo niiri est, si qusedam sibi 
reservat episcopus, quorum curam putat esse majorem, 
quam ut cuilibet possit, etiam non imperito, committi ? 
Quod quum tot sa^culis observation sit, ne populus, 
nimis facili proposita remissionis facultate, proclivius 
in scelera prolaberetur, Lutherus nunc demum, ne quis- 
quam difficultate Poenitentise deterreretur a peccando, 
quidlibet jubet permitti cuilibet non sacerdoti modo, 
sed etiam laico ; in tantum progressus ineptise, ut quum 
vulgo mulieres male audiant, quasi parum probe taceant, 
si quid audierint secretius, ille mulieres etiam velit viris 
esse a confessionibus. At mulierem quum docere non 
permittat Apostolus, non eliget, opinor, in sacerdotem 

336 Of Confession 

able to conceal any Thing of a Secret ; yet is he willing 
Men should have them to hear their Confessions ! But 
I suppose, since the Apostle permits not a Woman to 
teach, Luther will not make her a Priest; because he 
denies almost any to be a Priest, who is not a Preacher. 
But the Sentiments of the holy Fathers declare, That 
we ought to confess our Sins only to Priests, unless 
otherwise forced by Necessity: Let him come, (saith St. 
Augustin) to the Priests, who can administer to him the 
Keys of the Church. 7 He does not say, Let him come to 
Lay-men, or let him come to Women. The same Thing 
he further tells us more plainly, in another Place : He 
that repents, let him truly repent; let him signify his 
Grief by Tears ; let him present his Life to God by the 
Priest; let him prevent the Judgment of God by Con 
fession. For the Lord commanded them that should be 
cleansed, that they should shew themselves to the 
Priest: By this, teaching us, that Sins are to be con 
fessed by a corporal Presence. Likewise Pope Leo; 
Christ gave this Power to the Governors of the Church, 
that they should give the Satisfaction of Penance to 
them that confess. 7 Further, venerable Bede; Let us 
discover our light and daily Crimes to our Co-equals, 
and our grievous Sins to the Priest ; and as long as they 
have Dominion in us, let us take Care to purge them; 
for Sins cannot be forgiven, without Confession. 7 More 
over, what should Confession avail us, if Absolution did 
not follow by the Keys of the Church : But this Power 
(saith St. Ambrose) is given only to Priests. 7 In an 
other Place, he declares what the Sense of these Words 
is, when he says, The Words of God remit Sin, the 
Priest is Judge. Likewise St. Augustine, in another 
Place, writes most plainly, saying, He that doth Pen 
ance, without the Appointment of the Priest, frustrates 
the Keys of the Church. 7 Now let any one judge of the 

De Confessione 337 

Lutherus, qui, nisi prsedicantem, negat ferme quem- 
quam esse sacerdotem. At sacerdoti tantum confiten- 
dum esse, nisi necessitas ingruat, sanctorum Patrum 
declarat sententia. "Veniat, inquit Augustinus, ad 
antistites, per quos illi claves ministrantur Ecclesiae." 
!N"on dicit: Veniat ad laicos, veniat ad mulieres. Item 
alibi dicit apertius: "Quern poenitet, omnino poeniteat, 
et dolorem lacrymis ostendat, reprsesentet vitam suam 
Deo per sacerdotem, praeveniat judicium Dei per Con- 
fessionem: prsecepit enim Dominus mundandis, ut 
ostenderent ora sacerdotibus, docens corporali prsesentia 
confitenda peccata." Item Leo papa: "Christus hanc 
prsepositis Ecclesise tradidit potestatem, ut confitentibus 
Posnitentise Satisfactionem darent." Denique venera- 
bilis Beda: "Cosequalibus quotidiana et levia, graviora 
vero sacerdotibus pandamus, et quanto jusserit tempore, 
purgare curemus, quia sine Confessione peccata neque- 
unt dimitti." 

Prseterea quid prodesset Confessio, nisi per claves Ec- 
clesise sequeretur absolutio ? "At hoc jus," inquit Am- 
brosius, "solis permissum est sacerdotibus:" quod quo- 
modo velit intelligi, declarat alibi, quum dicit: "Ver- 
bum Dei dimittit peccata, sacerdos est judex." Alio 
item loco scribit Augustinus apertissime: "Erustrat 
claves Ecclesiae, qui sine sacerdotis arbitrio Posnitentiam 
agit." Nunc igitur judicet quisque quam vere sentit 
Lutherus, qui contra sanctorum omnium sententiam 
claves Ecclesiae trahit ad laicos, trahit ad mulieres, et ait 

338 Of Confession 

Truth of Luther s Opinion, who, contrary to the Senti 
ments of all the holy Fathers, draws the Keys of the 
Church to the Laity, and to Women; and says, that 
these Words of Christ, Whatsoever you shall bind, &c. 
are spoken not only to Priests, but also to all the Faith 
ful. Marcus Aemilius Scaurus, a Man most excellent, 
and of known Honesty, being accused at Rome to the 
People, by Varius Sucronensis, a Man of little Sincer 
ity; his Accuser having made a long and tedious Dis 
course ; Scaurus confidently relying on the Judgment of 
the People, not thinking him worthy of an Answer, said, 
Romans, Varius Sucronensis says it, Aemilius Scaurus 
denies it; which of them do you believe? By which 
Words, the People, applauding this honourable Man, 
scorned the idle Accusations of his babbling Adversary. 
Which Discourse seems not more applicable to them, 
than to what we hear state : For Luther says, That the 
Words of Christ concerning the Keys are spoken to the 
Laity; St. Augustine denies it: Which of them is the 
rather to be believed? Luther affirms, Bede denies; 
which of them will you believe? Luther affirms, St. 
Ambrose denies ; which of them has the greatest Credit ? 
Finally, Luther affirms it, and the whole Church deny 
it : Which do you think is to be believed ? But if any 
Body be so mad, as to believe with Luther, that he ought 
to confess himself to a Woman ; perhaps it may not be 
amiss for him also to follow the other Opinion of 
Luther; in which he persuades us, not to be too careful 
in calling to Mind our Sins. For certainly, it is not 
altogether convenient to be too solicitous in examining 
your Memory for what you are to put into such a Per 
son s Ear, who has so large and passable a Road from 
her Ear to her Tongue. Otherwise seeing it may be 
done without any such Danger; I shall not scruple to 
prefer, before the Council of Luther, the Example of the 

De Confessions 339 

verba Christi : "Qucecumque ligaveritis" et csetera, non 
sacerdotibus tantum, sed omnibus dicta fidelibus M. 
^milius Scaurus vir clarissimus, et exploratse probi- 
tatis, Eomse quum a Vario Sucronensi homine parum 
sincere accusaretur apud populum, et accusator oratione 
longa perorasset, ille breviter et sua, et populi fretus 
conscientia, non dignatus oratione contendere: "Quiri- 
tes," inquit, "Varius Sucronensis ait, ^Emilius Scaurus 
negat ; utri potius credendum censetis ? ?> Quibus verbis 
applaudente populo, vir honoratus hominis nihili fu- 
tilem accusationem elusit. Quse percontatio non illic 
magis mihi visa est, quam in prsesente qusestione con- 
gruere : nam verba Christi de clavibus laicis dicta, Lu- 
therus ait, Augustinus negat ; utri magis credendum esse 
censetis ? Lutherus ait, negat Beda ; utri magis creden 
dum censetis ? Lutherus ait, negat Ambrosius ; utri 
magis credendum censetis ? Denique Lutherus ait, 
tota negat Ecclesia; utri magis censetis esse creden 
dum ? 

At si quis adeo desipiat, ut, auctore Luthero, mulieri 
quoque putet esse confitendum, huic non inutile fortasse 
fuerit illud alterum Lutheri dogma suscipere, quo 
suadet non adhibendum multum studii ad recogitanda 
peccata. Non expedit profecto nimis anxie multa revo- 
care in memoriam, ut omnia in ejus infundas aurem, 
quse perviam et patulam viam ab auribus habet ad 
linguam. Alioqui quum res fieri potest absque tali peri- 
culo, non dubitem Lutheri consilio exemplum prophetae 
pra3ponere, qui dicit : "Recogitabo tibi omnes annos meos 
in amaritudine." Omnes, inquit, annos meos, sed in 
amaritudine. Talis enim Confessio non solum prseterita 

340 Of Confession 

Prophet; who saith, In Bitterness will I reckon over 
all my Years unto thee;* all my Years, (says he) and 
that in Bitterness: For such a Confession, not only 
cleanses from Sins past, but also begets abundantly new 
Grace ; according to that of St. Ambrose, St. Peter 
became more faithful after he bewailed the Loss of his 
Faith ; and so he obtained a greater Grace than he had 
lost/ St. Gregory, following him, says, That Life, 
which is fervent in Love after Sin, is much more accept 
able to God, than Innocency that is sluggish in Secur 
ity. When Luther calls them idle People, who are of 
Opinion that the Circumstances of Sin are to be con 
fessed ; see how much in this St. Augustine differs from 
him, when he says, Let him consider the Quality of the 
Crime ; as to the Place, Time, Perseverance, Distinction 
of Persons, and with what Temptation it was done, how 
often the Sin was committed ? For a Fornicator ought 
to repent according to the Excellency of his State, or 
Affairs, and according to the Quality of the Person with 
whom he has sinned; according to the Crime itself; if 
in a sacred Place, in Time of Prayer, as holy Days, and 
Times of fasting ; he is to consider how long he persisted 
in Sin, and let his Sorrow be according to his Persever 
ance in Sin, and by what Assault he was overcome ; for 
some there are, who, far from being overcome, do volun 
tarily offer themselves to Sin; nor do they stay for 
Temptation, but prevent the Pleasure : Let him consider 
with what Pleasure, and how often, he has committed 
the Sin: All these Circumstances are to be confessed, 
and bewailed ; that when he has known his Sin, he may 
soon find God propitious to him. In pondering the 
Weight of his Offences, let him consider of what Age 
he is, of what Understanding, and Order : Let him pon 
der each of these singly, and examine the Manner of 
*Isai. xxxviii. 15. 

De Confessione 341 

peccata diluit, sed novam etiam parit ubertim gratiam, 
juxta illud Ambrosii : "Fidelior f actus est Petrus, post- 
quam fide se perdidisse deflevit, atque ideo majorem 
gratiam reperit, quaxn amisit." Quern secutus Gre- 
gorius: "Fit, inquit, plerumque gratior Deo amore 
ardens vita post culpam, quam in securitate torpens 

Nam quum Lutherus otiosos homines appellet, qui 
censuerunt confitendas peccatorum circumstantias, 
Augustinus longe censet aliter. "Consideret," inquit 
Augustinus, u qualitatem criminis in loco, in tempore, in 
perseverentia, in varietate personse, et quali hoc fecerit 
tentatione, an ipsius vitii multiplici exsecutione. 
Oportet enim poenitere fornicantem secundum excellen- 
tiam sui status, vel officii, et secundum modum mere- 
tricis, et modum operis sui, et qualiter turpitudinem 
peregit, si in loco sacrato, si in tempore orationi con- 
stituto, ut sunt festivitates et tempora jejunii. Con- 
sideret quantum perseveraverit, et doleat, quam per 
se veranter peccaverit, et quanta victus fuerit oppugna- 
tione. Sunt enim qui non solum non vincuntur, sed 
etiam ultro se peccato otferunt, nee exspectant tenta- 
tionem, sed prseveniunt voluptatem. Et pertractet 
secum quam multiplici actione vitii, quam delectabiliter 
peccavit. Omnis ista varietas confitenda est, et deflenda, 
ut quum cognoverit quod peccatum est, cito inveniat 
Deum sibi propitium. In cognoscendo augmentum pec- 
cati, inveniat se cujus setatis fuerit, cujus sapientia3, et 
ordinis. Immoretur in singulis istis, et sentiat modum 
criminis, purgans lacrimis omnem qualitatem vitii." 
Hactenus Augustinus, quo uno haud scio an reperiat 
quemquam Lutherus ex his, quos otiosos vocat, qui dili- 

342 Of Confession 

the Crime, purging with Tears every Quality of the 
Vice. Hitherto the Words of St. Augustine: That 
Luther may not think that Circumstances do not apper 
tain to Confession; who has more diligently reckoned 
up the Circumstances of Sins, than this Holy Man ? I 
scarce know whether Luther will find any one of these he 
calls idle. But, if the various Circumstances of Sin are 
so diligently to be called to Mind, how much more are 
heinous and different Crimes to be collected, and our 
Conscience diligently to be examined, that, if possible, 
we may not let one Sin escape our Knowledge? For 
what Luther darts as a keen Shaft, That no Body can 
possibly confess all his Sins, because none can remember 
them all, is indeed but a very obtuse one: For who 
knows not, that none of those who said, all Sins are to be 
confessed, was so stupid as to think that a Man must 
tell the Priest in his Ear, what came not into his own 
Memory to confess ? 

De Confessione 343 

gentius enumerarit peccatorum circumstantias, ne putet 
Lutherus circumstantiarum nihil quicquam ad Con- 
fessionem pertinere. 

Quod si ejusdem peccati varise circumstantise sint, 
quoad possumus in memoriam revocandse, quanto magis 
gravia et diversa crimina colligenda sunt, et diligenter 
excutienda conscientia, ut, si fieri possit, nullum nobis 
patiamur excidere ? Nam quod Lutherus velut acutis- 
simum telum conjicit, neminem posse omnia peccata 
confiteri, propterea quod nemo potest omnium recordari, 
telum est obtusissimum : quis enim nescit neminem, qui 
dixit omnia peccata confitenda fuisse, tarn stolidum ut 
senserit etiam ilia sacerdoti narranda in aurem, quse 
confitenti non venissent in mentem ? 


f Satisfaction 

I KNOW not how Luther will satisfy others concern 
ing Satisfaction: For my Part, I think that, rather than 
he would remain silent, he would chuse to speak many 
Things of no Signification at all. For first, when he 
says, That the Church so teaches Satisfaction, as that 
the People can never understand true Satisfaction, 
which is a Renovation of Life; who does not see it to 
be a Calumny? Who taught Luther, that the Church 
does not teach, That we ought to renew our Lives ? He 
has not travelled over the whole Church; he has not 
been present at all Confessions, to hear this Ignorance 
of the Priests : He must then have the holy Ghost in his 
Bosom, or some Devil in his Breast, who has inspired 
this into him. But what Spirit soever this was, it could 
not be a good one, that taught him a Lye, but that 
Spirit, of whom it is said, The Devil is a Lyar, and the 
Father of Lyes;* for there is none that knows not that 
to be false, which Luther affirms to be true: For who 
was ever so doltish, as to enjoin such satisfactory Works 
for past Sins, as should indulge the future ? Who does 
not continually, when he absolves, pronounce these 
Words of Christ, Go, and sin no more?\ And that of 
St. Paul, As you have exhibited your Members to serve 
Uncleanness, and Iniquity, unto Iniquity, so now ex 
hibit your Members to serve Justice unto Sanctifica- 
tion.$ Who has not read that of St. Gregory, We are 
not able to perform our Penance, as we ought, unless we 

John viii. 44. fjohn viii. 11. fRom. vi. 19. 


2>e Satiafactione 

DE Satisf actione nescio an satisfaciat aliis ; mihi pro- 
fecto videtur potius, quam taceret, maluisse multis 
verbis nihil dicere. Nam primum quod ait Ecclesiam 
sic docere Satisf actionem, ut populus veram Satisfactio- 
nem non intelligat unquam, quse est innovatio vitse, quis 
non videt meram esse calumniam? Quis Lutherum 
docuit Ecclesiam non docere innovandam esse vitam? 
Totam non peragravit Ecclesiam, non omnibus interfuit 
confessionibus, ut hanc audiret inscitiam sacerdotum. 
Necesse est ergo aut Spiritum sanctum habeat in sinu, 
aut dsemonem aliquem in pectore, qui istud ei inspira- 
verit. Sed quisquis hie spiritus fuit, bonus esse non 
potuit, qui falsitatem docuit: sed spiritus ille de quo 
dictum est : "Diabolus mendax est,, ei Pater ejus." E"am 
nemo nescit f alsum esse, quod Lutherus affert pro vero. 
Quis enim unquam adeo stipes fuit, ut sic indiceret 
opera satisf actoria pro prseteritis, ut indulgeret futura ? 
Quis non assidue, quum absolvit, ilia Christi verba sue- 
cinit : <e ~Vade, et noli amplius peccare T Et illud Pauli : 
"Sicut exliibuistis membra vestra servire immunditice, 
et iniquitati ad iniquitatem, ita nunc exhibete membra 
vestra servire justitice in sanctificationem?" Quis non 
legit illud Gregorii : "Pcenitentiam quippe agere digne 
non possumus, nisi modum quoque ejusdem Poenitentiae 
cognoscamus. Posnitentiain quippe agere, est et perpe- 
trata mala plangere, et plangenda non perpetrare : nam 
qui sic alia deplorat, ut iterum alia committat, adhuc 
Poanitentiam agere ignorat, aut dissimulat. Quid enim 

346 Of Satisfaction 

know the Manner of the same Penance ? For to do Pen 
ance, is to bewail our Sins formerly committed, and re 
solve not to do any Thing hereafter that we should have 
cause to sorrow for. For he that laments the past, so 
as to commit the future, knows not how to perform 
Penance, but dissembleth. What avails it to any Body, 
to grieve for his Sins of Luxury, and yet to burn with 
Covetousness ? If there were Nothing of this said ; yet 
seeing the Priest imposes Penance for Sins committed, 
he shews that the Thing itself is not to be again com 
mitted, which must again be punished. It is therefore 
very evident, that Luther has no Regard to what he 
says, so he may but say Somewhat that may slander the 
Church: Which Thing always appears wheresoever, (as 
in some Matter of great Moment) he cries aloud, even 
as he does in these Words : For what monstrous Things 
are we indebted to thee, thou See of Rome! and to thy 
murthering Laws and Rites, whereby thou hast so de 
stroyed the whole World, that People think they can 
satisfy God for their Sins, by Works; when Nothing, 
but the Faith only of a contrite Heart, can satisfy; 
which, by these Tumults, thou not only puttest to 
Silence, but even oppressest, only that thy insatiable 
Blood-suckers may have People to say to them, bring, 
bring, that you may sell Sins P Who would not think, 
by reading these so furious and tragical Words, but 
Luther had discovered some great, and abominable 
Prodigies in the Roman See ? But he that diligently 
examines all these Things, will see that the Mountains 
bring forth a ridiculous Mouse: For first, how ridicu 
lous is that Exclamation of his against the See of Rome ? 
as if Works of Satisfaction were only exacted, and 
Penance imposed only at Rome, and not through the 
whole Church, in all Parts of the World ; or, as if many 
of the Laws, which he calls murthering Laws, were not 

De Satisfactions 347 

prodest, si peccata luxurise quis defleat, et tamen adhuc 
avaritiae sestibus anhelat?" Quod si nihil horum 
diceretur, tamen quum sacerdos indicit Poenitentiam 
pro commissis, ipsa redocet non esse rursus committenda 
quse rursus sint punienda. 

Lutherum ergo manifeste liquet nihil habere pensi 
quid dicat, modo verborum effutiat aliquid, quo calum- 
nietur Ecclesiam: quse res maxime semper patet, ubi- 
cumque, velut in re inaximi momenti, maxima voce 
declamat, quemadmodum in his verbis facit: "Quse 
monstra tibi debemus, Romana Sedes, et tuis homicidis 
legibus, et ritibus, quibus mundum totum eo perdidisti, 
ut arbitrentur sese posse Deo per opera pro peccatis 
satisfacere, cui sola fide cordis contriti satisfit, quam tu 
his tumultibus non solum taceri f acis, sed opprimis etiam 
tantum, ut habeat sanguissuga tua insatiabilis, quibus 
dicat : Affer, affer, et peccata vendat ?" Quis non arbi- 
tretur, quum hac verba legat tarn atrocia, tam tragica, 
Lutherum in Sede Romana deprehendisse ingentia et 
abominanda portenta ? At si quis omnia pensiculet dili- 
gentius, videbit parturiente monte, natum ridiculum 
murem: nam primum quam ridiculum est illud, quod 
exclamat in Romanam Sedem ? quasi Romse tantum, et 
non per omnem totius orbis Ecclesiam exigerentur opera 
Satisfactions, et injungatur Prenitentia: aut quasi 
leges, quas ille vocat homicidas, non sint editse plerseque 
a sanctissimis olim Patribus, et publico Christianorum 
consensu in synodis, ac generalibus conciliis. Denique 
quum dicit quod per opera non satisfit Deo, sed sola fide, 
si sentit quod non per sola opera sine fide, stulte baccha- 

348 Of Satisfaction 

ordained in former Times by the holy Fathers, and 
public Consent of all Christians, in Synods, and gen 
eral Councils. Finally, when he says, That we cannot 
satisfy God by Works, but by Faith alone ; if he means, 
that by Works alone, without Faith, we cannot do it; 
he shews but his Folly, by railing against the See of 
Rome; in which none was ever yet so foolish, as to say, 
that Works, without Faith, can satisfy ; being not igno 
rant of that of St. Paul, What is not of Faith is Sin.* 
But if he thinks that Works are superfluous, and that 
Faith alone is sufficient, whatever the Works be; then 
he says Something, and dissents truly from the Roman 
Church; which, with St. James, believes, That Faith, 
without Works, is dead.-\ You see how impertinently 
Luther troubles himself, who so furiously inveighs 
against the Roman See, as in the mean While thus to in 
volve himself in the Snares of Folly and Impiety. Al 
though indeed, I think it is more probable, that Luther 
is of Opinion, that Faith without good Works, is always 
sufficient to Salvation : For, that he is of that Opinion, 
evidently appears ; as well by other Passages of his, as 
by his saying, That God does Nothing regard our 
Works, nor has any Need of them : But he has Need that 
we should esteem him true in his Promises. What 
Luther meant by these Words, he knows best himself. 
For my Part, I believe, that God cares for our Faith 
and our Works, and that he stands in Need of neither 
our Faith, nor our Works. For though God has no 
Want of our Goods, yet has he so much Care of what 
we do, that he commands some Things to be done, and 
forbids other Things : Without whose Care, not so much 
as one Sparrow falls to the Earth, five of which are sold 
for two Farthings.% But because Luther urges that a 
Penitent ought only to renew his Life, and neglect to 
*Rom. xiv. 23. fJas. ii. 17, 20. JLu. xii. 6. 

De Satis factione 349 

tur in Sedem Romanam in qua nemo fuit unquam tarn 
stultus, qui diceret opera sine fide satisfacere, quum 
nemo nesciat illud Pauli: "Quod non est ex fide, pec- 
catum est." Sin opera sentit superflua, et fidem solam 
sufficere, qualiacumque sint opera, turn dicit aliquid, et 
vere dissentit a Sede Romana, quse credit divino Jacobo, 
quod fides sine operibus mortua est. Yidetis igitur quam 
inepte se commovet Lutherus, qui sic invehitur in 
Romanam Sedem, ut semet interea vel stultitise retibus, 
vel impietatis involvat. 

Quanquam profecto propinquius opinor vero Luthe- 
rum sentire fidem semper absque operibus bonis satis 
esse ad salutem : nam id ilium sentire, turn exaliis locis 
multis evidenter liquet, turn exeo, quod dicit: "Opera 
Deus nihil curat, nee eis indiget ; indiget autem ut verax 
in suis promissis a nobis habeatur." Quibus verbis quid 
senserit Lutherus, viderit ipse : ego certe Deum credo et 
fidem nostram, et opera nostra curare, et neque operibus 
nostris egere, neque fide: nam ut bonorum nostrorum 
non eget, qui Deus est, ita curam habet omnium, quse 
faciunt homines, qui aliud ab his fieri vetat, aliud jubet, 
sine cujus cura, ne unus quidem passer cadit super 
terram, quorum duo veneunt dipondio. Sed quia videtur 
Lutherus eo vergere, ut poenitens tantum ingrediatur 
novam vitam, ac negligat a sacerdote pro commissorum 
Satisfactione suscipere Poenitentiam, audiamus quid in 
hac quoque parte scribat sanctissimus Augustinus: 
"Non sufficit," inquit, "mores in melius commutare, et 
a preeteritis malis recedere, nisi etiam de his, quse facta 

350 Of Satisfaction 

undergo any Penance from the Piiest, for his past Sins ; 
let us hear what St. Augustine has writ on this Subject : 
It is not sufficient (says he) to change our Manners to 
better, and forsake our former Wickedness; unless we 
do also satisfy our Lord, for the Sins committed, by the 
Sorrow of Penance, by the Sobs of Humility; by the 
Sacrifice of a contrite Heart, with the Co-operation of 
Alms-deeds, and Fasts. And in another Place, he saith, 
Let the Penitent deliver himself altogether unto the 
Judgment and Power of the Priest ; reserving Nothing 
of himself to himself, that he may be ready to do all 
Things, as he is commanded, towards recovering the 
Life of the Soul ; which he should do, to avoid the Death 
of the Body. Likewise, in another Place, The Priests 
do also bind, (says he) while they enjoin the Satisfac 
tion of Penance to those who come to Confession ; they 
loose when they remit any Thing thereof : For they exer 
cise a Work of Justice towards Sinners, when they bind 
them with just Punishment; a Work of Mercy, when 
they remit Somewhat of the same Punishment : I hope 
I have plainly made appear how rashly he calumniates 
the Church ; and through the whole Sacrament of Pen 
ance, how impertinent, how impious, and how absurd he 
is against the holy Fathers ; against Scriptures ; against 
the public Faith of the Church ; against the Consent of 
so many Ages and People ; even against Common-sense 
itself ; with all which, he is not yet content ; but, after 
having held a long Time that Penance is a Sacrament, 
he began, in the End of his Book, to repent himself, that 
it should contain any Thing of Truth at all ; and there 
fore, as his Custom is, changes his Opinion into a worse, 
and wholly denies Penance to be a Sacrament. Yet he 
confesses before, That he does not doubt, but that who 
ever, of his own Accord, or moved by Reproofs, has pri 
vately confessed himself before any Brother, and de- 

De Satisfaction 351 

sunt, satisfaciat Domino per Poenitentise dolorem, per 
humilitatis gemitum, per contriti cordis sacrificium, 
cooperantibus eleemosynis, et jejuniis." Et alibi: 
"Ponat se poenitens," inquit, "omnino in judicio et 
potestate sacerdotis, nihil sui reservans sibi, ut omnia, 
eo jubente, paratus sit f acere pro recipienda vita animse, 
quse faceret pro vitanda corporis morte." Item alibi: 
"Ligant quoque," inquit, "sacerdotes, dum Satisfactio- 
nem Poenitentise confitentibus imponunt ; solvunt quum 
de ea aliquid dimittunt : opus enim justitise exercent in 
peccatores, quum eos justa poena ligant; opus miseri- 
cordise, quum de ea aliquid relaxant." 

Satis igitur aperte me docuisse confido, quam temere 
calumniatur Ecclesiam, et per omnem Poenitentise par- 
tern quam inepta, quam impia, et quam absurda contra 
sanctos Patres, contra Scripturam sacram, contra pub- 
licam Ecclesise fidem, contra tot setatum, tot populorum 
consensum, contra sensum ferme communem constituat : 
quibus tamen ille non est contentus, sed quum diu fassus 
esset Poenitentiam esse sacramentum, tandem in fine 
totius libri poenitere cospit eum, quod quicquam omnino 
liber haberet veri, eoque mutata, quod solet, in deterius 
sententia, Poenitentiam prorsus negat esse sacramentum. 
At idem ante fatetur se non dubitare quin quicumque 
coram quovis privatim fratre, vel sponte confessus, vel 
correptus veniam petierit, et emendaverit, ab omnibus 
occultis absolutus sit. Si ita sentit (quanquam falsum 
in hoc sentit, quod ait coram quovis privatim fratre, et 

352 Of Satisfaction 

manded Pardon, and amends himself, is absolved from 
all his secret Sins. 7 If that be his Sentiment, though 
false indeed ; (because he says, before any Brother pri 
vately, and that indifferently ; whether he ask Pardon of 
his own Accord, or as forced thereto by Rebukes : ) If, 
I say, he think such a Penance to be profitable, why 
excludes he it from the Number of the Sacraments ? not 
indeed for any other Intent, but that it may be the less 
valued; and, being deprived of the Name of a Sacra 
ment, (which amongst Christians is in great Venera 
tion) it might become despicable : For which Thing he 
finds no other Pretext, but that Penance has no visible 
Sign; as though the exterior Penance, or the very Act 
and Gestures of the Body, when the Priest absolves the 
Penitent, could not be a Sign of spiritual Grace, by 
which the Penitent obtains Remission. But, in fine, to 
conclude the Discourse of Penance, I wish he may at 
last repent himself, for having treated of Penance after 
so evil a Manner ; that he may wholesomely perform all 
its Parts, as he endeavours to destroy them all ; that he 
may be contrite for his Malice, confess publicly his 
Errors; and that, submitting himself to the Judgment 
of the Church, (which with so many Blasphemies he 
has offended) he may recompence for what he has before 
committed, with the greatest Satisfaction possible; for 
indeed he cannot do it worthily. 

De Satisfactione 353 

in hoc item, quod nihil interesse censet, an confiteatur 
ultro, an correptus petat veniam), tamen si Poeniten- 
tiam etiam talem censet esse tarn utilem, cur Poeniten- 
tiam eximit e niimero sacramentorum ? Non ob aliud 
omnino, quam ut haberetur in minore pretio, et viduata 
nomine sacramenti, quod apud Christianos est in venera- 
tione, vilesceret. Quam in rem non alium reperit pra> 
textum, quam quod Posnitentia non habeat signum 
visibile, quasi vel exterior Po3nitentia, vel ille ipse cor- 
poreus actus, et gestus, quo sacerdos absolvit poeniten- 
tem, signum esse non possit spiritalis gratise, qua 
poenitens consequitur remissionem. 

Sed ut aliquando finem loquendi faciam de Pceni- 
tentia, utinam aliquando pceniteat ipsum tarn male 
tractatse Poanitentise ; et cujus omnes partes conatur 
evertere, salubriter olim partes omnes adimpleat: con- 
teratur de malitia, publice confiteatur errores, et Eo 
clesiae, quam tot blasphemiis oft endit, judicio se sub- 
jiciens, quicquid ante commisit, quanta maxima potest 
(nam digna profecto non potest) Satisfactione recom- 
penset ! 


f Confirmation 

LUTHER is so far from admitting Confirmation to be 
a Sacrament, that, on the Contrary, he says, he admires 
what the Church s Intention was in making it one. And 
this most impertinent Babler trifles thus in so sacred a 
Thing; asking why the Church does not make three 
Sacraments of Bread, as having in Scripture some Occa 
sions to do it? The Church has not done any such 
Thing, because she takes no Occasions, from any Words 
whatsoever in Scripture, for having any other Sacra 
ments, than those which were instituted by Christ, and 
sanctified by his most holy Blood : Even so it omits none 
of them which have been given by Christ and his Apos 
tles, and transmitted to us, as it were, from Hand to 
iland, though Nothing should be writ of them in any 

But when he says, that Confirmation works no Salva 
tion, and that it is supported by no Promise of Christ; 
he only says this, proving Nothing, but only denying 
all. But when Luther makes Mention of some Passages, 
from which (though he laugh at it) the Sacrament of 
Confirmation may probably have its Beginning; why 
judges he so perversely of the whole Church, as if it 
should rashly admit a Sacrament; because he reads no 
Word of Promise in these Places; as if Christ had 
promised, said, or done Nothing, but what the Evan 
gelists mention in the Scriptures! By this Rule, if 
there was no Gospel but that of St. John, he should 
deny the Institution of the Sacrament of our Lord s 


De Sacramento Conffrmationis 

CONFIKMATIONEM adeo non recipit pro sacramento, ut 
etiam mirari se dicat quid Ecclesiae in mentem venerit, 
ut Confirmationem faceret sacramentum, et in re tarn 
sacra ludit et nugatur homo nugacissimus, quaerens cur 
non ex pane quoque faciant sacramenta tria, quum ansas 
quasdam habeant ex Scripturis. Ideo non f acit Ecclesia, 
quia non apprehendit ansam ex qualibuscumque Scrip- 
turse verbis alia condendi sacramenta, quam quse 
Christus instituit, et suo sanctincavit sanguine, quemad- 
modum e diverse nullum eorum omittit, quse a Christo 
et apostolis per manus deinceps tradita sunt, etiamsi 
nusquam quicquam de eis scriberetur: nam quod ait 
Confirmationem nullam operari salutem, nulla fulciri 
promissione Christi, hoc dicit tantum, neque probat 
quicquam, duntaxat negat omnia. 

At quum loca qusedam Lutherus ipse commemorat, e 
quibus, quanquam id Lutherus irridet, habere non ab- 
surde potuerit sacramentum Confirmationis initium, cur 
tarn maligne de tota judicat Ecclesia, quasi temere 
sacramentum suscipiat, propterea quod in illis locis 
nullum legit verbum promissionis ? quasi nihil omnino 
promiserit, dixerit, fecerit Christus, quod non com- 
plectantur evangelistse. Hac rations si tantum Joannis 
exstaret evangelium, negaret institutionem sacrament! 
in Coena Domini, de qua institutione nihil omnino per- 

356 Of Confirmation 

Supper ; of which Institution St. John writes Nothing 
at all: Many other Things done by Jesus have been 
omitted by all; which (as the Evangelist himself saith) 
are not written in this Book, and which the whole World 
could not contain ;* of which, some have, by the Mouth 
of the Apostles, been delivered to the Faithful, and have 
been ever after conserved by the perpetual Faith of the 
holy Catholic Church ; whom, I think, you ought to be 
lieve concerning some Things which are not in the Gos 
pels; when, (as St. Augustine says) You could never 
know which is the Scripture itself,, but by the Tradition 
of the Church. And though none should have been ever 
written, yet the Gospel would have always remained 
written in the Hearts of the Faithful, which was more 
antient than all the Books of the Evangelists. Let not 
Luther think it is a prevailing Argument to prove the 
Nullity of the Sacraments, not to find them instituted 
in the Scriptures. Otherwise, if he admits Nothing at 
all, but what he reads clearly in the Gospel, (that he 
may have no Place for Wrangling) how comes he to be 
lieve, (if he believes it, for he scarce believes any Thing 
at all) the perpetual Virginity of the blessed Virgin 
Mary? Of which he is so far from finding any Thing 
in Scripture, that Helvidius took Occasion by Scripture 
itself to prove the Contrary. Neither is any Thing op 
posed against him, but the Faith of the whole Church, 
which is no where greater and stronger than in the Sac 
raments. For my Part, I do not think that any Person, 
who has the least Spark of Faith in him, can be per 
suaded, that Christ, who prayed for St. Peter, that his 
Faith should not fail;\ who placed his Church on a firm 
Rock; should suffer her, for so many Ages, to be bound 
by vain Signs of corporal Things, under an erroneous 
Confidence of their being divine Sacraments. If Noth- 
*John xxi. 25. fLu. xxii. 32. 

De Sacramento Confirmationis 35 7 

scribit Joannes, qui eodem Dei consilio non tetigit istud, 
quo multa alia prseterierunt omnes, quse fecit Jesus: 
ff Quce" ut inquit evangelista, "non sunt scripta in libro 
hoc, et quce totus mundus non posset capere" Ex quibus 
rionnulla per apostolorum ora fidelibus patef acta sunt, et 
perpetua deinceps Ecclesise catholicse fide conservata : 
cui quare non debeas de quibusdam credere, quanquam 
non legantur in evangeliis, quum, ut Augustinus ait 
"nisi tradente Ecclesia scire non posses quse sint evan- 
gelia ?" Quorum si nullum unquam scriptum esset, 
maneret tamen evangelium scriptum in cordibus fideli- 
um, quod antiquius fuit omnium evangelistarum 
codicibus ; manerent sacramenta, quse et ipsa non dubito 
evangelistarum libris esse omnibus antiquiora, ne putet 
Lutherus efficax argumentum esse frustra suscepti sacra- 
menti, si non reperiat institutum in evangeliis. Alioqui 
si nihil omnino recipiat, quod non tarn aperte legat in 
evangelio, ut tergiversandi non sit locus, quomodo credit 
(si modo credit, qui fere nihil credit) perpetuam Marise 
virginitatem ? De qua adeo nihil invenit in Scripturis, 
ut Helvidius non aliunde quam ex Scripturarum verbis 
arripuerit ansam decernendi contrarium. Nee aliud 
opponitur illi, quam totius Ecclesise fides, quse nusquam 
major est, aut fortior, quam in sacramentis. 

Ego certe neminem esse puto, qui scintillam ullam 
habeat fidei, cui persuaderi possit quod Christus qui pro 
Petro oravit, ne fides ejus deficeret, qui Ecclesiam suam 
supra firmam petram collocavit, pateretur earn tot 
sseculis universam corporalium rerum signis inanibus, 
erronea fiducia velut divinis sacramentis obstringi. Si 
nusquam inde quicquam legeretur, illi tamen verbo 
men tern Domini poterant enarrasse, qui praesentes versati 

358 Of Confirmation 

ing should be read of it any where, yet those who were 
present, and conversed with our Lord, could, by Word of 
Mouth, tell what his Mind was, of whom himself says, 
Ye are Witnesses who have been with me from the Be 
ginning* What was to be done, might be taught by the 
Holy Ghost, of whom Christ said, But when the Para- 
elite comes, whom I will send you from the Father,, the 
Spirit of Truth which proceedeth from the Father, he 
*hall give Testimony of me.-\ And in another Place, 
When lie shall come, that is, the Spirit of Truth, he shall 
teach you all Truth, for he shall not speak of himself; 
but what Things soever he shall hear, he shall speak; 
and the Things that are to come he shall shew you.\ Shall 
we believe then, that the Church, having so many, and 
so great Ministers, so many living Evangelists, and that 
Spirit which inspires Truth, has rashly instituted a Sac 
rament, and puts her Hope in an empty Sign ? Or shall 
we not rather believe, that it has learned from the Apos 
tles, and from the Spirit of Truth ? Certainly, if the 
Name of this Sacrament, the Minister, and the Virtue 
promised in it, be considered, it will appear not to be a 
Thing which we may believe to be unadvisedly used by 
the Church. For, as Hugo de St. Victore saith, From 
Chrism is Christ named; from Christ, Christian; every 
one ought to have taken Chrism, or Unction, since from 
it they take their common Name. For we are all an 
elected Nation, and a royal Priesthood in Christ: We 
are not anointed, unless in Case of Necessity, but by the 
Bishops, that they may seal the Christian, and give him 
the Holy Ghost: Even (says he) as we read that the 
Apostles only, in the primitive Church, had Power to 
give the Holy Ghost by Imposition of Hands/ The 
same Doctor declares also the Fruit of the Sacrament ; 

"John xv. 27. JJohn xvi. 13. 

fJohn xv. 26. 1. Pet. ii. 9. 

De Sacramento Confirmationis 359 

sunt cum eo, de quibus ait ipse: "Vos testes estis, qui 
mecum ab initio fuistis" Docere poterat quid debebat 
fieri, Paracletus ipse, de quo dixit Christus: "Quum 
autem venerit Paracletus, quern ego miitam vobis a 
Patre meo, Spiritus veritatis, qui a Patre procedit, ille 
testimonium perhibebit de me." Et rursus: "Quum 
venerit ille, qui est Spiritus veritatis, ducet vos in 
omnem veritatem: non enim loquetur a semetipso, sed 
qucecumque audierit, loquetur; et quce futura sunt, an- 
nuntiabit vobis/ Ecclesia ergo quum tot et tales 
habuerit prseceptores, tot vivos evangelistas, et Spiritum 
ilium, qui veritatem inspirat, credetur temere instituisse 
sacr amentum, et spem in signo collocare nihili ? Non 
credetur potius ab apostolis, non credetur potius a 
Spiritu sancto didicisse? 

Certe si quis nomen hujus sacramenti, si quis ininis- 
trum, si quis virtutem, quam spondet, sestimet, videbit 
rem non esse talem, quam temere credatur Ecclesia sus- 
cepisse. "A chrismate enim," ut inquit Hugo de Sancto- 
Victore, "Christus dicitur: a Christo, Christianus; 
cujus ex quo nomen omnes communicare coeperunt, 
omnes unctionem accipere debuerunt, quia in Christo 
omnes electum genus sumus, et regale sacerdotium." 
Nee ungimur, excepta necessitate, nisi per episcopos, ut 
Christianum consignent, et Spiritum Paracletum tra- 
dant, quemadmodum idem ait Hugo, sicut, in primitiva 
Ecclesia, Spiritum sanctum per impositionem manuum 
dandi soli apostoli potestatem habuisse leguntur. 
Fructum quoque sacramenti idem Doctor declarat: 
"Sicut," inquit, a in Baptismo remissio peccatorum 
accipitur, ita per manus impositionem Spiritus Para- 
cletus datur. Illic gratia tribuitur ad remissionem 

360 Of Confirmation 

As the Remission of Sins, (saith he) is received in Bap 
tism; so, by the Imposition of Hands, the Holy Ghost 
is given: There, Grace is given to the Remission of 
Sins: Here, Grace is given to Confirmation; for what 
avails it you to be lifted up from your Fall, if you are 
not confirmed to stand? These are Hugo s Words, 
which are also consonant to Reason. For as in the cor 
poral Life, besides Generation, by which we get Life, 
another Action is required, by which we may increase, 
and grow to the Perfection of Strength : So, in the 
spiritual Life, which is required by Regeneration in 
Baptism, the Sacrament of Confirmation is necessary, 
by which the spiritual Life is led to perfect Virtue, and 
the Holy Ghost is given for perfect Strength. And be 
sides, the Sacrament of Baptism, which helps us to be 
lieve, Confirmation is profitable to give us Courage to 
confess our Faith boldly. For to this it is ordained, 
that Man may, before the Persecutor, boldly confess his 
Faith: And this is what Melchiades saith; In Baptism 
we are regenerated to Life, after Baptism we are con 
firmed for the Combat; for Confirmation arms and in 
structs us against the Agonies of this World. 

Finally, that Luther may understand that this Sacra 
ment is no new Thing, or vain Fiction ; but that it is so 
far from being void of Grace, that it confers the Spirit 
of Grace and Truth: We will here relate what St. 
Hierom has written of this Sacrament of Confirmation. 
If the Bishop impose his Hand, it is on them who have 
been baptized in the true Faith, who have believed in 
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, three Persons and one 
Substance. But the Arian, who believes in no other 
(stop your Ears, that you may not be polluted with the 
Words of such monstrous Impiety,) but in the Father 
alone, in Jesus Christ as a Creature, in the Holy Ghost 
as Servant to both ; how shall he receive the Holy Ghost 

De Sacramento Confirmationis 361 

peccatorum, hie gratia datur ad confirmationem. Quid 
autem prodest si a lapsu erigeris, nisi ad standum con- 
firmeris ?" Hactenus Hugo, cui recta quoque consentit 
ratio. Quemadmodum enim in vita corporali prseter 
generationem, per quam vitam consequimur, alia requi- 
ritur actio, per quam et crescimus, et ad perfectionem 
virtutis perducimur, ita in spiritali vita, quse per 
generationem Baptismatis acquiritur, opus est sacra- 
mento Confirmationis, per quam vita spiritualis ad per- 
fectam virtutem perducitur; et Spiritus sanctus datur 
ad perfectum robur. Et prseter sacramentum Baptismi, 
quod adjuvat ad credendum, Confirmatio prodest in 
adjutorium fortitudinis ad audacter confitendum. Ad 
hoc enim ordinatur, ut homo coram persecutore fidem 
confiteatur audacter; et hoc est, quod ait Melchiades: 
"In Baptismo regeneramur ad vitam, post Baptisma 
confirmamur ad pugnam:" nam Confirmatio ad hujus 
mundi agones armat, et instruit. 

Denique ut Lutherus intelligat hoc sacramentum 
neque novum esse, neque inane figmentum, sed adeo non 
vacare gratia, ut Spiritum etiam gratise conferat, ac 
veritatis, afferemus in medium quid beatus Hieronymus 
de Confirmationis sacramento scripserit. Ait enim: 
"Episcopus si imponit manum, his imponit, qui recta 
fide baptizati sunt, qui in Patre, et Filio, et Spiritu 
sancto, tres personas, et unam substantiam crediderunt. 
Arrianus vero, quum nihil aliud crediderit (claudite, 
quseso, aures, qui audituri estis, ne tantse impietatis 
vocibus polluamini) nisi in Patre solo vero Deo, et in 
Jesu Christo salvatore creatura, et in Spiritu sancto 
utriusque servo, quomodo Spiritum sanctum ah Ecclesia 

362 Of Confirmation 

from the Church, who has not as yet obtained Remission 
of his Sins ? For the Holy Ghost inhabits not, but 
where Faith is pure, nor remains but in that Church 
which has true Faith for her Guide. 

If in this Place, you ask why he that is baptized in 
the Church, receives not the Holy Ghost but by the 
Hands of the Bishop ? Learn, that this Observation is 
descended from this Authority; because, after our 
Lord s Ascension, the Holy Ghost descended on the 
Apostles, and we find the same to have been done in 
many Places. 7 Hitherto St. Hierom. Which Sentence 
is also confirmed by divers Passages in the Scripture, 
and particularly by that in the Acts, which shews that 
the People baptized before in Samaria, received the 
Holy Ghost, when Peter and John came among them, 
and laid their Hands upon them.* I therefore admire 
how it should come into Luther s Mind to dispute, that 
Confirmation is only to be accounted a Rite and a Cere 
mony, and deny it to be a Sacrament ; when it is demon 
strated, not only by the Testimony of holy Fathers, and 
by the Faith of the whole Church, but also by clear Pas 
sages of Scripture; that not only Grace, but also, the 
very Spirit of Grace, is conferred by the visible Sign of 
the Bishop s Imposition of Hands. 

Let Luther therefore forbear to contemn any more the 
Sacrament of Confirmation, which the Dignity of the 
Minister, the Authority of the Church, and the Profit of 
the Sacrament itself, commend. 

*Acts viii. 14-17 

De Sacramento Confirmationis 363 

recipiet, qui necdum remissionem peccatorum con- 
secutus est? Spiritus quippe sanctus nisi mundam 
fidem non incolit, nee habitator ejus templi efficitur, 
quod antistitem non habet veram fidem. Quod si hoc 
loco quseras quare in Ecclesia baptizatus nisi per manus 
episcopi non accipiat Spiritum sanctum, disce hanc ob- 
servationem ex ea auctoritate descendere, quod post 
ascensum Domini Spiritus sanctus ad apostolos de- 
scendit, et multis in locis idem factitatum reperimus." 
Hactenus Hieronymus: cujus sententise, quum alia 
multa Scripturse loca subscribunt, turn ille multo claris- 
sime, qui in Actis apostolorum declarat quod populus, 
qui ante baptizatus est in Samaria, descendentibus ad 
eos Petro ac Joanne, ac manus eis imponentibus, accepit 
Spiritum sanctum. Demiror igitur quid in mentem 
Luthero venerit, ut Confirmationem pro ritu tantum ac 
cserimonia contendat habendam, pro sacramento vero 
neget : quse non solum sanctorum testimonio Doctorum, 
et totius Ecclesia fide, sed etiam sacrse Scripturse claris- 
simis locis ostenditur visibili signo manus pontificise 
non gratiam tantum, sed et ipsum gratise Spiritum con- 
ferre. Desinat ergo Lutherus Confirmationis sacramen- 
tum contemnere, quod ministri dignitas, Ecclesia3 
auctoritas, et ipsius sacramenti commendat utilitas. 


f tbe Sacrament of flDarrtage 

MARRIAGE, the first of all Sacraments, celebrated by 
the first of Mankind, and honoured with our Saviour s 
first Miracle, being for so long Time had in a religious 
Veneration for its very Name of a Sacrament ; is now, 
at last, (that People should not so much regard or value 
conjugal Faith,) denyed by Luther to be any Sacrament 
at all; and as in other Sacraments, (some of which he 
takes away, by denying the Sign instituted; others, by 
denying promised Grace) he denies both of them to be in 
Marriage; (holding, that Grace has been no where 
promised thereby) he teaches also, That it has been no 
where instituted for a Sign : And how knows he this ? 
Because (says he) we read it not. O strong Reason, and 
Mother of many Heresies! This was the Fountain, 
from which Helvidius drew his Venom. You admit no 
Sacrament, unless you read its Institution in a Book! 
What Book has he ever writ who instituted all ? Con 
cerning some Things, (says he) I believe Christ s Evan 
gelists: Why then does he not, in some Things, believe 
also the Church of Christ; which is by Christ himself 
preferred to all the Evangelists, who have been only 
Members of the Church ? Wherefore, if he confides so 
much in one, why does he distrust all together ? If he 
attribute so much to a Member, why nothing at all to 
the whole Body ? 

The Church believes it to be a Sacrament ; that it has 
been instituted by God ; given by Christ ; and left to us 
by his Apostles; delivered afterwards by the Holy 


I>e Sacramento flDatrimonU 

MATRIMONIUM sacramentorum omnium primum inter 
primes homines celebratum, primo Christi miraculo 
cohonestatum, quod, propter sacramenti nomen, ipsum 
tandiu tarn religiose cultum est, Lutherus nunc demum, 
ne conjugalem fidem tanti quisquam putet in posterum, 
negat esse sacramentum ullum. Et quum alia sacra- 
menta sic sustulerit, ut in uno negaret institutum 
signum, in alio negaret promissam gratiam, in Matri- 
monio negat utrumque: nam negat usquam promissam 
esse gratiam; negat usquam institutum esse pro signo. 
Unde hsec novit ? "Quia non legitur," inquit. O ratio- 
nem fortem, et multarum hseresum parentem! Ex hoc 
fonte venenum hausit Helvidius. Nullum sacramentum 
admittis, cujus institutionem non legis in libro ? Quern 
librum unquam scripsit ille, qui instituit omnia ? "De 
quibusdam," inquit, "credo evangelistis Christi. Cur 
ergo de quibusdam Christi non credis Ecclesise, quam 
Christus omnibus prseponit evangelistis, qui non nisi 
membra qusedam fuerunt Ecclesise? Quamobrem, si 
fidis uni, cur diffidis omnibus ? Si membro tribuis tan- 
turn, cur toti nihil tribuis corpori ? Ecclesia credit esse 
sacramentum; Ecclesia credit a Deo institutum, a 
Christo traditum, traditum ab apostolis, traditum a 
sanctis Patribus, per manus deinceps pro sacramento 
traditum ad nos pervenisse, pro sacramento per nos 
tradendum posteris ad finem usque sseculi, .pro sacra 
mento venerandum. Hoc Ecclesia credit, et quod credit, 
dicit. Hoc, inquam, tibi dicit eadem Ecclesia, quse tibi 

366 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

Fathers for a Sacrament, and given as it were, from 
Hand to Hand down to us; from us also, as a Sacra 
ment, down to Posterity, and to be honoured to the End 
of the World. The Church believes this ; and tells you 
what it believes too. The same Church that says, The 
Evangelists writ the Gospel, tells you this also. For if 
the Church had not said, That the Gospel of John, is the 
Gospel of John, you should not have known it ; for you 
were not present when he writ it. Why then do you not 
believe the Church, when she tells you that Christ has 
done these Things; has instituted these Sacraments; 
that the Apostles have delivered them ; as well as when 
she says, That the Evangelists writ such, and such 

But Luther says, Marriage was amongst the antient 
Patriarchs, and amongst the Gentiles ; and that as truly 
as amongst us, yet was it not a Sacrament with either 
of them. 7 As for the Fathers that were under the Law, 
and before the Law, I do not agree with Luther; but am 
certain, that Marriage was a Sacrament with them as 
well as Circumcision. But amongst the Gentiles, the 
Case is otherwise; for their Marriage depended on the 
Custom and Laws of each People: So that some Mar 
riages were lawful with some of them, which by others 
were accounted ridiculous : And yet, contrary to Luther, 
we find some of Opinion, that even the Marriages of the 
Gentiles were a Sacrament amongst them. For St. 
Augustine says, That the Sacrament of Marriage is 
common to all Nations: But the Sanctity of it is only 
in the City of our God, and in his holy Mountain/ (the 
Church.) On which Sentiment, let him that pleases 
read Hugo de Sancto Victore. But though the Marriage 
of the Unfaithful be no Sacrament, yet does it not fol 
low what Luther infers, That the Marriage of the Faith 
ful is none either. For the People of God have some- 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 367 

dicit evangelistas scripsisse Evangelium: nam nisi Ec- 
clesia diceret evangelium Joannis Joannis esse, nescires 
esse Joannis: non enim assedisti scribenti. Cur ergo 
non credis Ecclesiae, quum dicit hsec Christum fecisse, 
hsec sacramenta instituisse, hsec apostolos tradidisse, 
quemadmodum credis ei, quum dicit haec evangelistam 
scripsisse ? 

"Matrimonium," inquit Lutherus, "erat apud an 
tiques Patres, erat apud Gentiles, et tamen apud neutros 
Matrimonium erat sacr amentum, quum tamen apud 
utrosque Matrimonium fuerit seque verum, atque apud 
nos. De Patribus, qui sub lege erant, et ante legem, non 
accedo Luthero ; imo plane censeo Matrimonium fuisse 
illis sacramentum, sicut fuit et Circumcisio. De 
Gentibus alia qua3stio est, quarum Conjugium totum 
pendebat a moribus ac legibus cuj usque populi ; eoque 
talia erant apud alias legitima conjugia, qualia haberen- 
tur alibi perabsurda. Quanquam non desunt, qui contra 
Lutherum sentiant etiam Gentium Conjugium sacra 
mentum esse : nam et beatus Augustinus ait quod sacra 
mentum Conjugii omnibus Gentibus commune est, 
sanctitas autem sacramenti non est, nisi in civitate Dei 
nostri, et monte sancto ejus. In quam sententiam, qui 
volet, Hugonem de Sancto- Victor e perlegat. 

Quanquam si Conjugium infidelium sacramentum 
non esset, non sequeretur tamen, quod Lutherus infert, 
ut ideo ne fidelium quidem Conjugium sacramentum 
sit. Populus enim Dei in Matrimonio quiddam habet 

368 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

thing more holy in Marriage, and have always had, as 
well as its first Institution, as when it was honoured 
with Laws given by God. Moreover, the Gentiles, he- 
cause it was acted as a human Thing amongst them, 
were wont, by Compacts and human Laws, to take 
Wives, and after to reject them again. Divorcement 
was not lawful in former Times amongst the People of 
God : For though God, by Moses, permitted the Bill of 
Divorcement among the Hebrews; yet Christ confesses 
that it was indulged them for the Hardness of the Peo 
ple s Hearts: For, from the Beginning (saith our Sa 
viour,) it was not so. But Christ hath restored Chris 
tians to pristine Sanctity, consecrating Marriage with 
an indesolvable Bond of Society; unless in Case of 
Fornication between those, whom no human Error, but 
God himself, has joined together. It follows not, there 
fore, that if Marriage has not been a Sacrament amongst 
the Gentiles, it must be none amongst us Christians, or 
has not been a Sacrament amongst the antient Patri 
archs ; amongst Christians, if it was no where read, yet 
the Faith of the Church ought to suffice us. And yet 
that one Passage of the Apostle, which Luther endeav 
ours to put by with a Scoff, does plainly demonstrate, 
that Marriage, not only now, but also at the very first 
Beginning of Mankind, was instituted a Sacrament: 
Which I suppose will not be doubted by any Body who 
reads that Part of the Epistle to the Ephesians, and at 
tentively considers it. Which whole Passage we have 
here inserted; because, by any Man s Words, it cannot 
be more clearly explicated, than it is already by the 
Apostle himself, who has so plainly shewn us his Mind 
therein, that no Place of Refuge is left to Luther s im 
pertinent Calumnies. For he saith, Let Women be sub 
ject to their Husbands, as to our Lord: Because the 
Man is Head of the Woman, as Christ is Head of the 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 369 

sanctius, habuitque semper, et quum prirnum instituere- 
tur, et quum datis a Deo legibus honestaretur. Porro 
apud Gentes, quoniam humana tantum res agebatur, 
adsciscere sibi conjuges ac rejicere pactis ac legibus 
humanis solebant. In Dei populo junctos Conjugio non 
licuit olim divelli. Nam quod per Moysem Deus per- 
misit Hebrais libellum repudii, Christus fatetur in- 
dultum propter duritiam populi : alioquin uxores animo 
suo non satis commodas interf ecturi : ff nam ab iniiio 
inquit Christus, "non erat sic! Christianos vero 
Christus ad pristinam revocavit sanctitatem, consecrans 
Matrimonium indissolubili vinculo societatis, excepta 
fornicationis causa, inter eos quos non humanus error, 
sed Deus rite conjunxit. !N"on sequitur igitur ut si Con- 
jugium non fuerit sacr amentum Gentibus, idcirco sacra- 
mentum aut nunc non sit Christianis, aut non fuerit 
priscis olim Patribus. 

Nam quod ad Christianos pertinet, etiam si nusquam 
legeretur, Ecclesise fides suflficeret. Et tamen unus ille 
locus ex Apostolo, quern Lutherus cavillo conatur 
eludere, manifesto docet Matrimonium non nunc tan 
tum, sed et olim quoque in generis humani primordiis 
institutum pro sacramento. Quod nemini, opinor, 
dubium relinquetur, qui locum ilium ex epistola ad 
Ephesios perleget et considerabit attentius, quern totum 
placuit inserere, propterea quod nullius interpretatione 
poterit res elucere clarius, quam ipsis verbis Apostoli, 
qui tarn aperte quod sensit, explicuit, ut ineptis Lutheri 
calumniis nullum reliquerit locum. Ait enim: "Mu- 
lieres viris suis subditce sint, sicut Domino: quoniam 
vir caput est mulieris, sicut Christus caput est Eccleswe, 
ipse Salvator corporis ejus. Sed sicut Ecclesia subjecta 
est Christo, ita et mulieres viris suis in omnibus. Viri, 

370 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

Church : Himself the Saviour of his Body. But as the 
Church is subject to Christ, so the Women to their Hus 
bands, in all Things. Husbands love your Wives, even 
as Christ loved the Church, and delivered himself for it. 
That he might sanctify it, cleansing it by the Laver of 
Water in the Word ; That he might present to himself a 
glorious Church, not having Spot or Wrinkle, or any 
such Thing ; but that it may be holy and unspotted. So 
also Men ought to love their Wives as their own Bodies ; 
he that loveth his Wife, loveth himself. For no Man 
ever hated his own Flesh, but he nourishes it and cher 
ishes it, as also Christ the Church ; because we are Mem 
bers of his Body, of his Flesh, and of his Bones: For 
this Cause shall a Man leave Father and Mother, and 
cleave to his Wife, and they shall be two in one Flesh ; 
This is a great Sacrament : But I speak in Christ, and 
in the Church. * You see how the blessed Apostle 
teacheth every-where, that the Marriage of Man and 
Wife is a Sacrament, which represents the Conjunction 
of Christ with his Church: For he teacheth, that God 
consecrated Matrimony, that it might be the Mystery of 
Christ joined with his Church. He tells you, That the 
Man and Wife make one Body, of which the Man is the 
Head ; and that Christ and the Church make one Body, 
of which Christ is the Head. He makes the chief Cause 
why the Husband ought to love his Wife, no other, than 
that he may not be an unlike Sign to Christ, whom he 
represents: And this he makes rather the Cause, than 
that common Nature of the Male and Female, which of 
itself should also excite Love. He, by the same Exam 
ple, exhorts the W T ife to fear and respect her Husband ; 
that is, because she represents the Church of Christ. 
And after he has by many Words inculcated these 
Things over and over again; (fearing lest any Body 
*Ephes. v. 22 fol. 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 371 

diligite uxores vestras, sicut et Christus dilexit Eccle 
siam , et semetipsum tradidit pro ea, ut illam sanc- 
tificaret, mundans earn lavacro aquce in verbo vitce, ut 
exhiberet ipse sibi gloriosam Ecclesiam non habentem 
maculam, aut rugam, aut aliquid hujusmodi, sed ut sit 
sancta, et immaculata. Ita et viri debent diligere 
uxores suas, ut corpora sua. Qui suam uxorem diligit, 
seipsum diligit. Nemo enim unquam carnem suam odio 
habuit, sed nutrit et fovet earn, sicut et Christus Eccle 
siam; quia membra sumus corporis ejus, et de carne 
ejus, et de ossibus ejus. Propter hoc relinquet homo 
patrem suum, et matrem suam, et adhcerebit uxori suce: 
et erunt duo in carne una. Sacramentum hoc magnum 
est, ego autem dico in Christo et Ecclesia/ 

Videtis ut beatus Apostolus Matrimonium viri et 
uxoris docet undique sacramentum esse, quod reprse- 
sentat conjunctionem Christi cum Ecclesia. Docet enim 
consecratum a Deo Matrimonium, ut esset Christi cum 
Ecclesia conjuncti sacramentum, atque ideo virum com- 
parat Christo, uxorem Ecclesire. Virum caput esse dicit 
ejus corporis, quod unum f acit cum foemina ; Christum 
caput esse dicit ejus corporis, quod unum facit cum 
Ecclesia. Prsecipuam causam facit cur vir uxorem 
diligat non aliam, quam ne dissimile signum sit Christi, 
quern reprsesentat ; et hanc potiorem causam facit, quam 
communem masculi et foemellse naturam, quse et ipsa 
potuisset incitare ad diligendum. Mulierem vero, ut 
virum timeat ac revereatur, eodem exemplo provocat, 
nempe quod ilia referat Ecclesiam obedientem Christo. 
Quse quum iterum atque iterum multis verbis inculcas- 
set, ne quis hanc viri cum Christo et uxoris cum Ecclesia 
collationem putaret similitudinem esse quampiam 
drmtaxat exhortandi gratia desumptam, ostendit rem 

372 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

should think this Comparison of the Husband with 
Christ, and the Wife with the Church, to be some 
Similitude, used only for the Conveniency of the Ex 
hortation,) he shews it to be a true Matter, a true Sacra 
ment, foretold by the Prophesy of the chiefest and first 
of all Prophets, when the World was but newly created : 
For when the Apostle saith, He that loves his Wife, 
loves himself ; for no Man ever hated his own Flesh, but 
loves and cherishes it, even as Christ loveth his Church ; 
because, (says he) we are Members of his Body, of his 
Flesh, and of his Bones/ This he spoke to remind us of 
the W T ords, much like to these, which Adam spoke, when 
Eve was first brought into his Sight, This is Bone of my 
Bone, and Flesh of my Flesh. 

And that the Apostle might more clearly shew that 
the Sacrament of the Conjunction of Adam and Eve 
pertains to that Union of Christ with his Church, he 
added Adam s very Words, Wherefore a Man shall 
leave Father and Mother, and cleave to his Wife; and 
they shall be two in one Flesh. 7 * This Sacrament, saith 
the Apostle, is great in Christ and the Church. How 
could he have more evidently refuted Luther, than by 
these Words, which he so impertinently scoffs at, in con 
tending that the Apostle had taken away the Sacrament 
from the Marriage of Man and Wife, by saying, This 
Sacrament is great in Christ and his Church ? As if he 
should, by saying, the Sacrament of Baptism is great in 
the washing of the Soul, deny the Baptism of the Body 
to be a Sacrament; or, as if he should, by saying, the 
Sacrament of the Eucharist is great in the Body of 
Christ, deny the Species of Bread and Wine to be a Sac 
rament ; or, as if by saying, That the same Sacrament is 
great in the mystical Body of Christ, he should detract 
the Sacrament from the Body which he took of the 
*Gen. ii. 23. 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 373 

esse veram, verum esse sacramentum a prophetarum 
omnium primo, primoque ejus ipsius vaticinio, orbe jam 
turn recens condito, prgenunciatum. Nam quum dixis- 
set : "Qui suam uxorem diligit, seipsum diligit. Nemo 
enim carnem suam odio liabuit, sed nutrit, et fovet earn, 
sicut et Christus Ecclesiam: quia membra sumus" in- 
quit, "corporis ejus, et de came ejus, et de ossibus ejus." 
Quse verba dixit Apostolus, ut nos in memoriam duceret 
eorum verborum quse verbis istis similia dixit Adam, 
quum in conspectu ejus primum adducta est Eva : "Hoc 
nunc os ex ossibus meis, et caro de carne mea." Et ut 
evidentius ostenderet Apostolus ad Christi copulam cum 
Ecclesia pertinere sacramentum conjunctionis Adse cum 
Eva, Adse verba ipsa subjunxit: (f Propterea relinquet 
homo patrem et matrem, et adhcerebit uxori suce: et 
erunt duo in carne una. Hoc sacramentum inquit 
Apostolus, tf magnum est in Christo et Ecclesia/ Quo- 
modo potuisset Apostolus evidentius refellisse Luthe- 
rum, quam his ipsis verbis, quse Lutherus inepte conatur 
eludere ? Qui ex eo quod Apostolus dixit sacramentum 
hoc magnum esse in Christo et Ecclesia, contendit Apos- 
tolum abstulisse sacramentum a Matrimonio viri et 
uxoris, tanquam si quis ita loqueretur: Sacramentum 
Baptismi magnum est in ablutione animse, negaret Bap- 
tismum corporis esse sacramentum; aut si quis diceret 
sacramentum Eucharistise magnum esse in ipso Christi 
corpore, negaret panis et vini species esse sacramentum ; 
aut si dicat idem sacramentum esse magnum in Christi 
corpore mystico, sacramentum detraheret corpori, 
quod sumpsit de Virgine ? Quis unquam vidit quem- 
quam tain nugace glossemate, tanta se cum gloria 
jactantem ? 

374 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

blessed Virgin. Who has ever seen any Man swell with 
greater Pride for so frivolous a Gloss ? For if the 
Apostle had been of his Opinion, and willing his Words 
should be so interpreted, as to shew this Sacrament to be 
great only in Christ and his Church, without any Refer 
ence at all to the Marriage of Man and Wife ; it would 
lessen the Force and Weight of all those Things, where 
by, in that Comparison of the two Conjunctions, he had 
before commended Marriage. 

It would also, in another Manner prejudice the Mat 
ter he undertook, if he should refer these Words of 
Adam only to Christ and his Church, which, of them 
selves, seem to unite Man and Wife together in mutual 
Love, so as to teach, that there is in them no Reference 
to Man and Wife. The Apostle teaches, that those 
Words of Adam, were a Prophecy of Christ and his 
Church ; which is confirmed by all the holy Doctors, and 
very clearly demonstrated by Adam s speaking these 
Words at the very first Sight of Eve, by which he pre 
ferred a Wife to Father and Mother; nor as yet any 
Command of begetting Children, to instruct him, by 
the Comparison of Parents and Children, what Father 
and Mother were. Because, if those Words of Adam 
were a Prophecy of Christ and his Church, then it seems 
they either did not belong to that Marriage which was 
there performed; or that some Marriage, as a proper 
Sign of this Conjunction, was then made a Sacrament 
by God himself, whose Spirit then formed the Words of 
Adam, that the same Words might signify what was 
then done, and what was prophesied ; that is, the Mar 
riage of Men, and the Conjunction of Christ with the 
Church; and as one Sacrament comprehends a sacred 
Thing, and the proper and sacred Sign of the same 

Moreover, that you may the more plainly discern, that 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 375 

Nam si Apostolus hoc sensisset, et sic voluisset accipi, 
ut hoc sacramentum magnum esset duntaxat in Christo 
et Ecclesia, neque pertineret quicquam ad viri et uxoris 
Matrimonium, imminuisset robur et pondus illorum 
omnium, quibus ilia comparatione duarum conjunctio- 
num commendaverat ante Conjugmm. Quin alia 
quoque ratione nocuisset causae quam susceperat, si ilia 
Protoplasti verba, qua3 per se posita videbantur conjuges 
in mutuum amorem trahere, sic traxisset ad Christum et 
Ecclesiam, ut nihil pertinere doceret ad virum et 
uxorem. Verba ilia Adse fuisse vaticinium de Christo 
et Ecclesia docet Apostolus, et omnes Doctores sancti 
confirmant, et ipsa res ostendit. Nam ad primum Evse 
conspectum protulit ea verba, quibus patri et matri prse- 
ferebat uxorem, quum ipse neque patrem habuisset 
neque matrem, neque adhuc prseceptum procreandi libe- 
ros, ut parentum et liberorum collatione cognosceret, 
quid pater esset, aut mater. Quod si ilia Protoplasti 
verba fuerunt vaticinium de Christo et Ecclesia, tune 
aut nihil pertinuisse videntur ad Matrimonium quod 
agebatur, et de quo dici videbantur, aut illud ipsum 
Matrimonium velut illius conjunctions idoneum sig- 
num, ab ipso Deo, cujus Spiritu formabatur Ada? 
loquentis os, sacramentum instituebatur : ut eadem verba 
possent, et in id quod agebatur, et in id etiam quod 
pra3nuntiabatur, hoc est in hominum Conjugium, et 
Christi cum Ecclesia copulam competere, et tanquam 
unum sacramentum ex re sacratissima, et ejusdem rei 
sacro et congruente signo, comprehendere. 

Prseterea, ut liquido patere possit Lutherum nihil 

376 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

what Luther speaks, is to no Purpose ; observe, that the 
Apostle s Business, in that Place, to the Ephesians, is 
not about teaching them how great a Sacrament Christ 
joined with the Church, is; but about exhorting mar 
ried People how to behave themselves one towards an 
other, so as they might render their Marriage a Sacra 
ment, like, and agreeable to, that so sacred a Thing, of 
which it is the Sacrament. Luther., therefore, in this 
Place, is either negligent himself, and unadvisedly reads 
this Passage, or else he most impiously dissembles what 
Truth he discovers therein; when he says, That which 
we give, (which is the Sense of the whole Church) pro 
ceeds from great Idleness, Negligence and inconsiderate 
Reading thereof. 7 Does St. Augustine therefore care 
lessly read the Apostle? Has St. Hierom negligently 
understood him ? and all Men except Luther, by whose 
Vigilance St. Paul himself is discovered to have writ, 
not a Sacrament, but a Mystery ? O this quick-sighted 
Man! who is able to see that the whole Latin Church 
does wrongfully name that a Sacrament, which the 
Apostle, writing in Greek, calls Mystery, and not Sac 
rament ! as though the Latins had erred by speaking the 
Word in Latin, because St. Paul does not use a Latin 
Word in the Greek Tongue. If the Interpreter had 
translated it not a Sacrament, but a Mystery, and had 
left the Greek Word entire ; yet had not this taken away 
the Argument, whereby Marriage is, from this Place of 
the Apostle, concluded to be a Sacrament ; seeing it is 
taught so to be, by the Circumstance of the whole Mat 
ter. For let him wrest the Word Mystery, as much as 
he will ; yet can he never by it take away, or deny, the 
Sacrament, though thereby it may not be proved. 
Neither shall it be said, that he speaks or thinks ill, 
who says, that the Eucharist is a great Mystery; for 
there is no Sacrament but what is a Mystery, that is, 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 377 

dicere, non hoc agit Apostolus in illo loco ad Ephesios, 
ut doceret ex illis verbis quam magnum esset sacra 
mentum Christus conjunctus cum Ecclesia, sed ut 
moneret conjunctos Matrimonio, ut se sic mutuo gere- 
rent, ut ipsorum conjugium rei tarn sacrse, cujus sacra- 
mentum erat, idoneum et quam simillimum sacramen- 
tum redderent. Lutherus igitur hoc in loco, vel oscitat 
ipse, atque indiligenter et inconsulte legit ilium locum, 
aut, quod lectione comperit, impietate dissimulat, quum 
hunc intellectum, quern attulimus, et quomodo intelligit 
Ecclesia, respondet esse magnse oscitantise, et intelli- 
gentis inconsultatseque lectionis. Ergo Augustinus 
oscitanter legit Apostolum? Oscitanter legit Hierony- 
mus ? Oscitanter omnes, prseter unum Lutherum ? Qui 
vigilantia sua deprehendit Paulum ipsum non scripsisse 
sacramentum, sed mysterium? O hominem oculatum, 
qui viderit totam Ecclesiam latinam perperam vocare 
sacramentum id quod Apostolus, dum grsece scriberet, 
appellet mysterium, non sacramentum : quasi ideo latini 
errarent, qui rem efferant latine, qui a Paulus in lingua 
grseca non utatur latino vocabulo. Quod si non sacra 
mentum, sed mysterium vertisset interpres, et grsecam 
vocem reliquisset integram, non abstulisset tamen argu- 
mentum quo ex eo loco Apostoli concluditur Matri- 
monium esse sacramentum, quum id ita esse rei totius 
doceat circumstantia. Nam ut maxime torqueat mys- 
terii verbum, nunquam tamen efficiet ut, etiamsi non 
statuat sacramentum, ideo tollat ac neget sacramentum ; 
neque male aut sentire dicetur, aut loqui, qui sic 
loquatur: Eucharistia magnum est mysterium. Qua- 
mobrem, quum nullum sit e sacramentis, quod non idem 
sit mysterium, utpote quod sub visibili signo complecti- 
tur arcanam et invisibilem gratiam, interpres animad- 
vertens in illis Pauli verbis ad Ephesios totius loci 
seriem declarare planissime id mysterii genus Apos- 

378 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

what contains, under a visible Sign, a secret and invisi 
ble Grace; the Interpreter noting in the Words of St. 
Paul to the Ephesians, that the whole Passage does most 
evidently declare the Apostle to write of such a Mystery 
as is a Sacrament. And if he had not truly translated 
it, St. Augustine and St. Hierom, his Readers, were 
not so careless, but they would have discovered the 
Errors in the Translation: JSTor were they so much in 
clined to favour Marriage, as to follow an Error, rather 
than correct it, when once discovered ; especially, seeing 
St. Augustine was nothing inferior to Luther, in the 
Knowledge of the Greek Tongue : And St. Hierom, who, 
without Doubt, was the most skilled of his Time in that 
Language, did so favour Virginity, that, by some Per 
sons, he was thought to be almost unjust towards Mar 

Wherefore, that all Men may the more easily under 
stand, not only these, whom Luther in Contempt calls 
sententious, and now idle Readers ; but also the best and 
most learned of the antient Fathers of the Church ; let 
us here what St. Augustine says, Not only Fsecundity, 
(says he) whose Fruit is in the Off-spring; not only in 
Chastity, whose Bond is Faith/ but also the Sacrament 
of Marriage, is commended to the Faithful, married 
People : For which Reason, the Apostle says, Husbands 
love your Wives, even as Christ loved his Church : * St. 
Augustine, then, calls it a Sacrament ; and that Luther 
may not say he has read this Passage carelessly, he 
treats of the same Text, again and again, in divers 
Works. For in another Place, he says, It has been said 
in Paradise, Man shall leave Father and Mother, and 
cleave to his Wife; f which by the Apostle is called a 
great Sacrament in Christ and his Church. 

Why does not St. Augustine explicate that Mystery of 
Ephes. v. 25. fGen. ii. 24. 

De Sacramento Matrlmonii 379 

tolum describere, quod vere sit sacramentum, ac prae- 
terea videns Ecclesiam totam Matrimonium observare 
pro sacramento, mysterium illic, ut debuit, vertit sacra 
mentum. Qui si verbum non recte vertisset, neque tarn 
oscitantes erant lectores aut Hieronymus, aut Augus 
tinus, ut vertentis errorem non deprehenderent, neque 
tarn proni fautores Conjugii, ut deprehensum sequeren- 
tur potius, quam castigarent, prsesertim quum Augus- 
tinus graecarum litterarum peritia non cederet Luthero, 
et Hieronymus ejus linguae sine controversia doctis- 
simus, adeo virginitati faverit, ut apud multos Matri- 
monio parum aequus fuisse videretur. 

Quamobrem, ut omnes facilius intelligant non eos 
tantum, quos per contemptum vocat sententiarios, a Lu 
thero nunc appellari lectores oscitantes, sed veteres 
etiam Ecclesise Patres optimos et doctissimos, audiamus 
quid ait beatissimus Augustinus : "Non tantum," inquit, 
"foecunditas, cujus fructus in prole est, nee tantum 
pudicitia, cujus vinculum est fides, verum etiam sacra 
mentum nuptiarum commendatur fidelibus conjugatis. 
Unde dicit Apostolus : Viri f diligite uxores vestras, sicut 
et Christus dilexit Ecclesiam." Augustinus igitur sac 
ramentum vocat, quern ne dicat Lutherus oscitanter et 
indiligenter legisse locum; iterum atque iterum, aliis 
atque aliis operibus in eamdem sententiam eumdem 
locum tractat. Ait enim alibi: "Dictum est in Para- 
diso: Relinquet homo patrem et matrem f et adhcerebit 
uxori sues. Quod magnum sacramentum dicit Apos 
tolus in Christo et Ecclesia." Cur hie non explicat 
Augustinus illud Lutheri mysterium, errorem esse, quod 
latini vocant sacramentum? quoniam graece Paulus ap- 

380 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

Luther to be an Error, which the Latins call a Sacra 
ment; seeing that in the Greek Text St. Paul calls it 
Mystery, not Sacrament ? St. Augustine,, above a thou 
sand Times, calls it the Sacrament of Marriage; as in 
that Place where he says, That Off -spring, Faith, and 
Sacrament, which are all the Goodness of Marriage, is 
fulfilled in the Parents, of Christ himself. Why has 
he not here admonished us, that it is not a Sacrament, 
but a Mystery? For if what Luther says, be true, to 
wit, That it is not a Sacrament, but concern Christ and 
his Church; then is it not true which St. Augustine 
says: For that which Luther takes for only a Mystery, 
is not thf good Sacrament of Marriage, nor has it been 
fulfilled in the Marriage of the Virgin Mary. 

And in another Place, St. Augustine, treating of the 
same Words of the Apostle, says, What is great in Christ 
and the Church, is very little in Man and Wife; and 
yet it is an inseparable Sacrament of Conjunction. 

If Luther holds that it is not called a Sacrament, un 
less in Christ and his Church ; the Apostle s very Words, 
if diligently examined only by a Grammarian, shall con 
vince him ; as when the Apostle says, This Sacrament is 
great; but I say in Christ and the Church. What Sacra 
ment is that, that is great in Christ and the Church? 
Christ and the Church cannot be a Sacrament in Christ 
and the Church : For none speaks after this Manner. It 
is therefore a necessary Consequence, that this Sacra 
ment, which he says is great in Christ and the Church, 
is that Conjunction of Man and Wife which he has 
spoken of. There is ^Nothing else but this spoken here 
by the Apostle, viz. This Conjunction of Man and 
Woman, is a great Sacrament in Christ and the Church, 
as a sacred Sign in a most sacred Thing. Lastly, if 
Luther still obstinately deny, that (by these Words of 
the Apostle) Marriage should be called a Sacrament; 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 381 

pellat mysterium, non sacramentum. Augustinus plus 
millies appellat sacramentum connubii, et sacramentum 
nuptiarum : quemadmodum et illie, ubi dicit, quod omne 
nuptiarum bonum impletum est in ipsis Christ! parenti- 
bus, proles, fides, sacramentum. Cur hie non admonuit 
nos non esse sacramentum, sed mysterium ? Praeterea, 
si verum dicit Lutherus sacramentum non esse, nisi in 
Christo et Ecclesia, verum non dicit Augustinus. Nam 
neque illud sacramentum bonum est nuptiarum, prse- 
sertim ut accepit Lutherus, qui dicit duntaxat esse mys 
terium, neque in Marise nuptiis impletum est. 

Et iterum super eadem Apostoli verba dicit Augus 
tinus : Quod in Christo et Ecclesia est magnum, hoc in 
singulis quibusque viris et uxoribus est minimum, sed 
tamen conjunctions inseparabile sacramentum. Quod 
si Lutherus dicat non vocari sacramentum, nisi in 
Christo et Ecclesia, revincetur etiam ipsis Apostoli 
verbis, si diligenter expendantur vel a grammatico. 
Nam quum Apostolus dicat : "Sacramentum hoc mag 
num est,, ego autem dico in Christo et Ecclesia" quod 
est illud sacramentum, quod magnum est in Christo et 
Ecclesia ? Christus et Ecclesia non potest esse sacra 
mentum in Christo et Ecclesia : nemo enim sic loquitur. 
Necesse est igitur ut id sacramentum, quod dicit esse 
magnum in Christo et Ecclesia, sit ilia conjunctio viri 
cum conjuge, de qua dixerat. Non aliud igitur dicit 
Apostolus, quam hoc, id est ilia conjunctio viri et mulie- 
ris, magnum est sacramentum in Christo et Ecclesia, 
tanquam sacrum signum in re sacerrima. 

Denique si pertinaciter neget Lutherus in illis Apos 
toli verbis Conjugium vocari sacramentum, sed tantum 
Christi copulam cum Ecclesia, saltern non negabit istud. 

382 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

but merely the Conjunction of Christ with the Church : 
Yet surely he will not deny Conjunction of Man and 
Wife to be at least a Sign of that sacred Conjunction of 
Christ and his Church, and that too by God s own Insti 
tution ; not by human Invention, seeing our first Parents 
were joined by God himself. But if he denies all this 
that has been said; the Apostle s Words will, however, 
manifest his Impudence: For it is so often, and so 
plainly repeated, that he who should not see it, must un 
doubtedly confess himself to be blind. 

If therefore it shall evidently appear, that Grace is 
conferred by Marriage, which is a Sign of so sacred a 
Thing ; Luther will be compelled, whether he will or no, 
to admit Marriage as a Sacrament, or else to reject all 
Sacraments ; seeing that, by his own Confession, a Sac 
rament consists in the Sign of a sacred Thing, and the 
Promise of Grace. Let us see then, if it can be evi 
dently made out, that Grace is infused after any Man 
ner by Marriage ; for Luther flatly denies it. 

We read in no Place, (says he) that he who marries 
a Wife shall receive any Grace from God. Marriage 
(says the Apostle) is honourable in all, and a Bed un- 
defiled:* The Bed could not be undefiled, if the Mar 
riage wanted Grace; neither has Marriage any Thing 
else to confer, but a Bed unspotted. But because God, 
whose Bounty has provided, that no necessary Thing 
should be wanting, even to irrational Creatures, accord 
ing to their several Natures and Capacities ; nay, even 
to Things wanting Sense; has, by the like bountiful 
Providence, joined Grace to Marriage, by which, he that 
does not slight it, but keeps his Faith inviolate to his 
Wife, shall not only not contract any Blemish by the 
carnal Act, (whose filthy Concupiscence would other 
wise stain him) but shall, on the Contrary, be advanced 
*Hebr. xiii. 4. 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 383 

quin ilia conjunctio viri et mulieris signum saltern sit 
sacrse illius conjunctionis, qua Christus conjungitur cum 
Ecclesia, idque ex institutione Dei, quum primi 
parentes, Deo ipso copulante, conjunct! sunt, non autem 
humano ingenio inventum postea. Istud saltern, quod 
dixi, Lutherus si neget ex Apostoli verbis patere, negabit 
impudentissime : nam hoc in eo loco tarn ssepe, tarn 
aperte dicitur, ut qui non id videat, caecum se fateatur 
oportet. Igitur si Conjugio, quod rem tarn sacram 
significat, constabit etiam conferri gratiam, tune, velit, 
nolit, cogetur Lutherus aut Conjugium pro sacramento 
suscipere, aut omnia prorsus sacr amenta rejicere, quum, 
ipso fatente, signum rei sacrse cum promissione gratia? 
faciant sacramentum. 

Videamus igitur an aliquo modo liquere possit in- 
fundi Conjugio gratiam ; nam id aperte negat Lutherus : 
"Nusquam," inquit, "legitur aliquid gratise Dei acceptu- 
rum, quisquis uxorem duxerit." "Honorabile Con 
jugium," inquit Apostolus, "in omnibus, et thorns im- 
maculatus;" thorus macula carere non posset, si Con 
jugium careret gratia. Nee aliunde habet Conjugium, 
ut thorum servet immaculatum, quam quod Deus, cujus 
providit bonitas, ut nee rebus his, quse naturali feruntur 
ordine, etiamsi non ratione tantum, sed etiam sensu 
careant, quicquam deesset eorum, quse pro cuj usque 
captu sint necessaria, simili benignitate curavit ut Con 
jugio gratiam jungeret, qua quisquis earn nollet ab- 
jicere, et fidem debitam servaret Conjugii, et ex com- 
mixtione carnali, cujus alioqui fceda concupiscentia 
macularetur, non solum non contraheret labem, sed 
etiam proveheretur ad gloriam. Conjugium enim non 
haberet thorum immaculatum, nisi quia gratia, quae 
infunditur Conjugio, verteret illud in bonum, quod alias 

384 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

to Grace. For Marriage should not have an immaculate 
Bed, if the Grace, which is infused by it, did not turn 
that unto Good, which should be otherwise a Sin. 
Which, in another Passage of St. Paul, where he treats 
of the Woman s Duty, is more plainly demonstrated; 
She (saith he) shall be saved, through the Generation 
of Children:* But if you take away Marriage, what else 
shall Generation be, (by which, as the Apostle saith, 
there is no Salvation in Marriage) but Death and eter 
nal Damnation? For, Take away Marriage, (says St. 
Bernard) and an undefiled Bed from the Church, and 
do you not then fill it with Adulteries, Incests, Sodomy, 
and all Sorts of Uncleanness? If all Generation, out 
of Wedlock, is damnable, the Grace of Marriage must 
needs be great, by which that Act, (which of its own 
Nature defiles to Punishment) is not only purged, to 
take away the Blemish ; but is so much sanctified, that, 
as the Apostle testifies, it becomes meritorious. Neither 
has it that Privilege of Grace, but by Virtue of the Sac 
rament, consecrated for that Purpose by God himself; 
that Man, at his first Creation, might, by the Use there 
of, both perform his Duty of Propagation, and have also 
a Remedy of Concupiscence, when restored: Yet what 
should the conjugal Act itself be, but Concupiscence, if 
God had not made it the Remedy thereof ? Which now 
the holy Grace of the Sacrament has so made a Remedy 
of Concupiscence, as that the paternal Substance may 
not be negligently consumed, (as the prodigal Son had 
done) forbidding not only, not to thirst after stolen 
Waters of other Men s Cisterns, but also not to inebriate 
ourselves with our own; but make our sober Draughts 
so wholesome, that they may profit to Life everlasting. 
The Apostle, in the same Place, though he exhorted as 
much as possible to Continency and Virginity, (Virtues 
*I. Tim. ii. 15. 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 385 

esset peccatum. Quod ipsum et alibi quoque, quum de 
mulieris agit officio, Paulus designat apertius: ff Salva- 
bitur" inquit, "per filiorum generationem" At si 
tollas Conjugium, quid aliud fuerit generatio, per quam, 
ut Apostolus ait, salvabitur in Conjugio, quam mors et 
sterna damnatio ? "JSTam tolle, inquit beatus Bernar- 
dus, de Ecclesia honorabile connubium, et thorum im- 
maculatum, nonne reples earn concubinariis, incestuosis, 
semininuis, mollibus masculorum concubitoribus, et 
omni denique genere immundorum." Si igitur extra 
Conjugium omnis generatio damnabilis est, magna 
videtur gratia Matrimonii, qui eumdem actum (si natu- 
ram respicis) ex quo maculareris in poenam, non solum 
ita purgat, ut eluat labem, sed etiam sic sanctificat, ut 
Apostolo teste, reportet prsemium. Nee istud habet 
privilegium gratiaB, nisi virtute sacramenti ab ipso Deo 
in id consecrati, ut homini ipsius cultori foret et in 
propagationis officium, quum creatus est, et in remedi- 
um concupiscentise, quum restitutus est. Quanquam ille 
ipse conjugalis actus quid esset aliud, quam concupis- 
centia, nisi Deus ilium faceret remedium concupis- 
centise ? Quern nunc sancta sacramenti gratia sic fecit 
concupiscentise remedium, ut eos, qui gratise paternas 
substantiam, quam Deus infundit Conjugio, negligenter 
nolit, ut filius prodigus fecit, effundere, non solum de- 
fendat, ne quid aquae furtivse sitiant e cisternis alienis, 
sed etiam ne se inebrient suis, et sobrios haustus efficiant 
tarn salubres, ut in vitam proficiant a3ternam. 

et Apostolus in illo etiam loco, ubi, quantum 
potuit, hortabatur ad continentiam et virginitatem, con- 
trariam conjugali generation: virtutem, tamen Matrj- 

386 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

contrary to conjugal Generation) yet confesses, that 
Marriage is the Gift of God ; and one of those Gifts, of 
which it is said, Every good and perfect Gift is from 
above, descending from the Father of Lights.* And cer 
tainly the Gift of God, (which is so given, that he who 
receives it, may continue in that State of Life, in which 
he ought to remain, and not fall into the State of De 
struction) doth it not shew that it hath in itself pre 
servative Grace ? 

Moreover, when the Apostle saith, If any Brother 
have a Wife, an Infidel, and she consent to live with 
him, let him not put her away : And if any Woman have 
an Husband, an Infidel, and he consent to dwell with 
her, let her not put away her Husband: For the Man, 
an Infidel, is sanctified by the faithful Woman; and the 
Woman, an Infidel, is sanctified by the faithful Hus 
band; otherwise, your Children should be unclean; but 
now they are holy.^ Do not these Words of the Apostle 
shew, that, in Marriage (which is an entire Thing of 
itself, after one of the Parties is converted to the Faith) 
the Sanctity of the Sacrament sanctifies the whole Mar 
riage, which before was altogether unclean? But why 
should that Marriage be now more holy than before, (as 
being a Marriage) if, for one of the Parties converted, 
sacramental Grace were not added to it, which, before 
Baptism, (the Door of all the Sacraments) could not 
enter to the Marriage of the Unfaithful ? 

But, to pass by the Apostle ; let us consider God, the 
Consecrator of this Sacrament. Has he not consecrated 
Marriage with his Blessing, when he joined together our 
first Parents? For the Scripture saith, God blessed 
them; saying, increase, and multiply :% Whose Bless 
ing, having operated in all other living Creatures, ac 
cording to their several Capacities ; who should doubt 
*Jas. i. 17. fl. Cor. vii. 12. JGen. i. 28. 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 387 

monium etiam Dei donum fatetur, nimirum ex illis, de 
quibus dicitur: ff Omne datum optimum,, omne donum 
perfectum desursum est, descendens a Patre luminum." 
Et certe donum Dei, quod ideo datur, ut qui accipit, in 
eo vitse statu sit, in quo servari debeat, ne in eum decidat 
statum, in quern si cadit, pereat, annon habere se docet 
adjunctam prseservatricem gratiam ? Ad hsec quum ita 
dicat Apostolus : "Si quis / rater uxorem habet infidelem, 
et hcec consentit habitare cum illo, non dimittat illam. 
Et si qua mulier fidelis habet virum infidelem, et hie 
consentit habitare cum ilia, non dimittat virum. Sanc- 
tificatus est enim vir infidelis per mulierem fidelem, et 
sanctificata est mulier infidelis per virum fidelem. 
Alioqui enim filii vestri immundi essent, nunc autem 
sancti sunt" annon his verbis ostendit Apostolus, quod 
quum integra qusedam res sit Conjugium, postquam alte- 
rutra pars ad fidem conversa est, sanctitas sacramenti 
totum sanctificat Conjugium, quod prius totum fuit im- 
mundum ? At cur istud Conjugium plus haberet sancti, 
quam prius, quatenus Conjugium est, nisi, propter 
alterius accedentem fidem, accederet Conjugio sacra- 
mentalis gratia quae, ante Baptismum, qui sacramen- 
torum omnium janua est, ad infidelium Conjugium non 
potuit ingredi ? 

Sed prsetereamus Apostolum. Consideremus hujus 
sacramenti consecratorem Deum. Annon ille, quum 
primes parentes conjungeret, Conjugium benedictione 
sacravit ? Ait enim Scriptura : "Benedixit illis Deus, 
ac dixit: Crescite et mulliplicamini." Cujus benedictio, 
quum in reliquis animantibus ad corporis robur pro 
cuj usque captu sit operata, quis dubitet in homine ra- 
tionis capace vim gratige spiritalis infudisse spiritui: 

388 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

but that he has infused the Force of spiritual Grace 
into the Spirit of Man, who alone is capable of Reason, 
unless he did believe, that God, (being so bountiful to 
the meanest of Beasts, as to give them largely, according 
to their Natures, what was necessary) should be so spar 
ing of his Blessings to Man, whom he created after his 
own Image; that having only Regard to his Body, he 
should omit the Soul, that Breath of Life, which he him 
self has breathed, and by which he was most repre 
sented, without imparting any Part of that great Bless 
ing to it? 

Further; when Christ, God and Man, conversing 
amongst Men, not only honoured Marriage with his own 
Presence, but also adorned it with his first Miracle ; has 
he not taught, That Marriage is to be honoured? And 
without Grace, I do not find any Thing in it deserving 
Honour. Nor do I think he would have been present 
at it, if Marriage had not already some Grace, which 
might render it acceptable to Christ; or else he con 
ferred Grace to it himself: But I see, the Miracle that 
he wrought,* admonishes us that the insipid Water of 
carnal Concupiscence, by the secret Grace of God, is 
changed to Wine of the best Taste. But why search we 
so many Proofs in so clear a Thing? especially, when 
that only Text is sufficient for all, where Christ says, 
Whom God has joined together., let no Man put asun 
der, f the admirable Word! which none could have 
spoken, but the Word that was made Flesh ! who thinks 
it not to have been abundantly sufficient, that God has 
joined the first of Mankind ; and that the Bounty of so 
great a God is to be admired by all Men ? But now we 
are taught from Truth itself, that those who are law 
fully married, are not rashly joined together ; not by the 
Ceremonies of Men only, but by the invisible Presence 
*John ii. tMatt, xix. 6. 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 389 

nisi quis Deum credat, quum infimis quibusque bestiolis 
fuisset tarn benignus, ut pro sua cuique natura largitus 
sit affluenter, homini, quern ad ipsius condidisset imagi- 
nem, tarn parce manum in benedictione restringeret, ut, 
corporis duntaxat habita ratione, animain, illud vitse 
spiraculum, quod ipse inspiraverat, et qua maxime 
reprsesentabatur, tanta benedictione prseteriret intac- 

Iterum, quum Christus homo et idem Deus versatus 
inter homines, nuptias non solum sua honoravit prae- 
sentia, sed etiam nobilitavit miraculo, annon docuit 
honorandum esse Connubium? Quod ego certe non 
video quid honore dignum habere possit absque gratia. 
N"eque ilium puto ad nuptias fuisse venturum, nisi vel 
jam turn haberet aliquid gratiae Conjugium, quod ipsum 
Christo faceret gratum, vel ut Conjugio gratiam ipse 
conferret. Quin et miraculum, quod operabatur, nos ad- 
monere video insipidam concupiscentise carnalis aquam, 
per occultam Dei gratiam, in optimi saporis vinum esse 

Sed quid opus est in re tarn clara tot probamenta con- 
quirere ? Prsesertim quum vel unus ille locus abunde 
sufficiat, quo Christus ait: f Quos Deus conjunxit, homo 
non separet" O verbum admirabile, et quod nemo 
potuisset effari, prseter Yerbum quod caro factum est! 
Quis non putasset abunde satis esse, quod primos 
homines, initium generis, conjunxisset Deus ? Atque id 
ipsum fuerat, in tanta Deitatis ma j estate, nulli non 
admiranda benignitas. At nunc, Veritate referente 
didicimus quicunque legitimo Conjugio copulantur, eos 
non temere neque mortalium duntaxat cserimoniis, sed 
ipso Deo invisibiliter assistente, et insensibiliter co- 

390 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

and insensible Co-operation of God himself : And there 
fore is it forbidden, that any should separate those whom 
God has joined together. O Word as full of Joy and 
Fears as it is of Admiration ! Who should not rejoice, 
that God has so much Care over his Marriage, as to 
vouchsafe, not only to be present at it, but also to pre 
side in it ? Who should not tremble, whilst he is in 
Doubt how to use his Wife, whom he is not only bound 
to love, but also to live with, in such a Manner, as that 
he may be able to render her pure and immaculate to 
God, from whom he has received her ? 

Wherefore, seeing that God himself, as he says, joins 
all married People together; who believes not that he 
infuses Grace by Marriage ? Does he join always, and 
give his Blessing but once? Why reassumes he the 
Office of joining, if we believe him not also to reassume 
that of Blessing? Or can we imagine, that the most 
holy Spirit, which is to be adored in Spirit and in 
Truth, should always exercise the Office of joining mar 
ried People, for Care of carnal Copulation only? In 
deed, as for that Matter, it should be sufficient that God 
leaves Man, like other Animals, to his own natural and 
corrupt Inclinations. There must be understood Some 
thing sure more holy than the Care of propagating the 
Flesh, which God performs in Marriage ; and that, with 
out all Doubt, is Grace; which is by the Prelate of all 
Sacraments infused into married People in consecrating 

Seeing therefore, we have, by so many Reasons, 
proved Grace to be conferred in Marriage; and that 
Marriage, which (as appears by the Words of the Apos 
tle) is a Sign of a sacred Thing, (which Sign, is joined 
with Grace, as is already said) cannot be a bare Figure 
only; it follows then, that, in Despite of Luther, Mar- 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 391 

operante conjungi. Atque ideo vetitum ne, quos Deus 
junxit, ullo separentur ab homine. O verbum non ad- 
miratione magis, quam gaudio pariter et timore ple 
num ! Quis non laetetur Deo tantse curaa esse suum Con 
jugium, ut non solum interesse, sed etiam prseesse 
dignetur ? Quis non inhorrescat, dum dubitet quomodo 
debeat tractare conjugem, quam non solum tene- 
atur amare, sed etiam sic convivere, ut puram et sine 
macula possit Deo, quo tradente recepit, repoacenti 
reddere ? 

Igitur quum Deus, ut dicit ipse, conjungat omnes, 
quis ab illo credet Conjugio non infundi gratiam ? An 
qui semper copulat, semel duntaxat benedixit? Cur 
jungendi resumit officium, nisi credatur et benedicendi 
repetere ? An sanctissimum ilium Spiritum, quern in 
spiritu et veritate oportet adorare, putandum est assidue 
subire ministerium copulandorum conjugum, copulse 
tantum cura carnalis ? Certe, quod ad earn rem attinet, 
sufficeret Deo si genus humanum, quemadmodum csetera 
animalia, naturae ab ipso inditse, et hominis vitio cor- 
ruptse relinqueret. Sanctius igitur aliquid subesse opor 
tet, ultra carnis propaganda curam, quod augustum 
illud Dei numen in Conjugio peragat, id est baud dubie, 
quod Antistes sacramentorum omnium conjugibus in- 
fundit in Conjugio consecrando gratiam. 

Ergo, quum tot modis probavimus conferri in Con 
jugio gratiam, Conjugium vero sacrse rei signum esse 
patet et ex Apostolo, quod signum, quum gratiam, sicut 
ostendimus, adjunctam habeat, figura duntaxat esse non 
possit, consequens est ut, invito Luthero, Conjugium 
sacramentum sit, etiamsi sacramenti nomine, quod 

392 Of the Sacrament of Marriage 

riage is a Sacrament; though it had not, (as it is) been 
so called by the Apostle. 

But has any one, either Antient or Modern, doubted 
to call Marriage a Sacrament, without being hissed at 
by the Church ? In which alone, as Hugo de Sancto Vic- 
tore mentions, is found a two-fold Sign : Tor Marriage 
itself is the Sacrament of the Society, which is in the 
Spirit between God and Man ; but the Duty of Marriage 
is the Sacrament of that Society, which in the Flesh is 
between Christ and the Church. For if that (says he) 
which is in the Flesh, is great, much more that which is 
in the Spirit : And if God is rightly called in Scripture, 
a Bridegroom, and the Soul of Man the Bride, there is 
certainly Something betwixt God and the Soul; of 
which, what consists in Marriage betwixt Man and 
Woman, is the Sacrament, and Image. But perhaps, 
(to speak more expressly) that Society, which is ex 
teriorly observed, according to the Contract in Mar 
riage, is the Sacrament; and the mutual Love of the 
Souls, which is kept by an interchangeable Bond of con 
jugal Society and Alliance, is the Matter of the Sacra 
ment. And again ; this same Love, by which Male and 
Female are spiritually united in the Sanctity of Wed 
lock, is the Sacrament and Sign of that Love, by which 
God is interiorly joined to the rational Soul, by Infusion 
of his Grace, and Participation of his Spirit. Thus far 
the Words of Hugo. 

Wherefore, seeing that not only the public Faith of 
the Church, for so many Ages before us, and the antient 
Fathers, remarkable for their virtuous Lives and 
Knowledge in Scripture; but also the blessed Apostle, 
St. Paul., Doctor of the Gentiles, have esteemed Mar 
riage as a Sacrament, (which makes Wedlock honour 
able, and does by Grace, not only conserve the Bed un 
spotted from Adultery ; but also washes away the Stains 

De Sacramento Matrimonii 393 

tamen facit, non appellaret Apostolus. Sed quis un- 
quam aut veterum, ant novorum, nisi quos explosit Ec- 
clesia, Matrimonium dubitavit appellare sacramentum ? 
"In quo uno," quod Hugo de Sancto-Victore com- 
memorat, "duplex invenere signum : nam et Conjugium 
ipsum sacramentum est illius societatis quse in Spiritu 
est inter Deum et animam, officium vero Conjugii sacra 
mentum est illius societatis, quse in carne est inter 
Christum et Ecclesiam. Nam si magnum est/ inquit, 
"quod in carne est, multo magis utique est, quod in 
spiritu est. Et si recte per Scripturam sanctam Deus 
Sponsus dicitur, et anima rationalis Sponsa vocatur, 
aliquid profecto inter Deum et animam est, cujus id 
quod in Conjugio inter masculum et foeminam const at, 
sacramentum et imago est. Sed forte, ut expressius 
dicam, ipsa societas, quse exterius in Conjugio pacto 
foederis servatur, sacramentum est, et ipsius sacramenti 
res est dilectio mutua animorum, quse ad invicem socie 
tatis et fcederis conjugalis vinculo custoditur. Et hsec 
rursus ipsa dilectio, qua masculus et foemina in sancti- 
tate Conjugii animis uniuntur, sacramentum est, et 
signum illius dilectionis, qua Deus animse rationali intus 
per infusionem gratise suse, et Spiritus sui participa- 
tionem, conjungitur." Hactenus Hugo. Quamobrem, 
quum non solum publica fides Ecclesiae tot ante nos 
sa3culis, ac vetusti Patres Scripturarum scientia et vitse 
meritis insignes, sed ipse etiam beatus Apostolus et 
Doctor Gentium Paulus Matrimonium habuerint pro 
sacramento, quod honorabile faciat connubium, et 
thorum per gratiam non solum servet immaculatum ab 
adulterio, sed et abluat immunditiam libidinis, et aquam 
convertat in vinum, sanctamque procuret voluntatem a 
licitis nonnunquam abstinendi complexibus, non video 
quid contra Lutherus possit afferre nisi quod "hseretici," 
ut beatus ait Bernardus, "pro libitu quisque suo sacra- 

394 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

of Lust, turns Water into Wine, and procures a holy 
Pleasure of abstaining, even from lawful Pleasures.) 
I do not perceive what Luther can say to the Contrary ; 
unless it is because Hereticks (as St. Bernard saith) do 
still, according to their own Fancies, strive who shall 
exceed others, in endeavouring, with their viperous 
Teeth, to tear in Pieces the Sacrament of the Church, 
as the Bowels of their Mother. 


f tbe Sacrament of rbers 

IN the Sacrament of Orders, Luther keeps no Manner 
of Order; but gathering together from here and there 
all the Treasuries of his Malice, he pours them out 
against it. 

He shews how well his Miind is composed for Evil, 
if his Power were answerable thereto: He proposes 
many Things, and asserts and affirms the worst: But, 
satisfying himself by only saying, thus, and thus, he 
confirms Nothing at all, by any Manner of Reason. In 
which Proceeding his great Impudence appears, who, 
not vouchsafing to believe the whole Church, (without 
having Reasons for its Faith) does unreasonably require 
that he himself should be credited, without shewing any 
Reason at all ; and that in Matters of such Nature, as 
he cannot tell what is to be believed, unless the Church 
teach him: And yet he desires to be believed, and that 
in such Sort, as to do it, is to confound and trample 
under Foot the whole Church : For what else aims he at, 
by endeavouring to take away the Holy Sacrament of 

De Sacramento Ordinis 395 

menta Ecclesise, tanquam matris viscera, dente vipereo 
certatim inter se dilacerare contendunt." 


Be Sacramento r&tnis 

IN sacramento Ordinis nullo procedit ordine ; sed 
hinc atque inde colligens omnes malitiae suse thesauros 
effundit, animum ostendit egregie versum ad nocendum, 
si respondeant vires, proponit multa, asserit atque af- 
firmat pessima, sed omnia sat habens dicere, nihil 
prorsus ulla ratione confirmat. Qua ex re videre licet 
insignem hominis impudentiam, qui quum toti credere 
non dignetur Ecclesise, nisi rationem reddenti suse fidei, 
sibi ut credatur uni sine ratione postulet, idque de rebus 
ejusmodi, de quibus quid credat cognoscere, nisi Ec- 
clesia docente, non potest. Et tamen sic postulat sibi 
credi, quomodo, si quis credat, non aliud agat, quam ut 
totam confundat atque pessumdet Ecclesiam. Nam quid 
aliud molitur, qui conatur tollere sacrosanctum sacra- 
mentum Ordinis, quam ut, postquam mysteriorum minis- 
tri viluerint, incipiant utpote etiam, quse per viles minis- 
trentur, vilescere sacramenta ? quem unum scopum toto 
petit opusculo. De Ordine igitur, quia nullo procedit 
ordine, colligemus hinc inde Lutheri dogmata, ut acer- 

396 Of the Sacrament of Orders 


Orders, than, by rendering the Ministers of the Church 
contemptible, he may procure, that the Sacraments of 
the Church may be also despised, and undervalued, as 
being ministered by the Hands of vile and unworthy 
Ministers : Which is the only Drift of his whole Work. 
And because Luther proceeds with no Order, in treat 
ing of Order; we will gather his Opinions here and 
there, that the Reader may have under one View that 
Heap of Evils; which being looked over, we need not 
take any great Pains, I suppose, to convince him, whose 
wicked Doctrine all Men may see tends directly to the 
Destruction of the Faith of Christ, by Infidelity. For 
what designs he else, who disputes that there is no Dif 
ference of Priesthood between the Laity, and Priest? 
that all Men are Priests alike: That all Men have the 
same Power, in what Sacrament soever : That the Min 
istry of the Sacraments is not given to the Priests, but 
by Consent of the Laity : That the Sacrament of Orders 
is Nothing else but the Custom of electing a Preacher in 
the Church: That he is not a Priest, who is not a 
Preacher, unless it be equivocally, as a painted Man, 
may be called a Man: That a Priest may be made a 
Layman again, when he pleases; because his priestly 
Character is Nothing: Moreover, that Order itself, 
which as a Sacrament, ordains some to be Clergymen, 
is merely and altogether a Fiction invented by Men, 
who understand Nothing of ecclesiastical Matters, of 
Priesthood, of the Ministry, of the Word, or of a Sacra 
ment? Finally, this holy Priest, (whereby you may 
conjecture how chaste he himself is) makes it the great 
est Error, and greatest Blindness imaginable, that 
Priests should undertake to lead a single Life. And 
when Christ praises those who have made themselves 
Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven ; this most filthy 
Antichrist compares them to the old idolatrous gelded 

De Sacramento Ordinis 397 

vum ilium malorum lector semel habeat sub oculis, quo 
conspecto non erit, opinor, multum insumendum operse 
ut ilium coarguamus, cujus impiam doctrinam videbunt 
omnes eo recta contendere, ut omnem Christi fidem 
possit infidelitate pervertere. 

Quid enim destinat aliud, qui decernit inter laicos 
et sacerdotes nullum esse discrimen sacerdotii, omnes 
ex sequo presbyteros esse, omnes eamdem habere potes- 
tatem in quocumque sacramento ? Sacerdotibus sacra- 
mentorum ministerium non nisi laicorum consensu 
committi ? Sacramentum Ordinis nihil aliud esse posse, 
quam ritum quemdam eligendi concionatoris in Ec- 
clesia ? Quicumque non praedicat, eum non esse sacer- 
dotem, nisi sequivoce, quemadmodum homo pictus est 
homo, qui sacerdos est, rursus fieri posse laicum: 
characterem enim nihil esse. Ordinem denique ipsum 
(qui velut sacramentum homines in clericos ordinat, qui 
prsedicare nesciunt) esse vere mere omninoque figmen- 
tum ex hominibus natum nihil de re ecclesiastica, de 
sacerdotio, de ministerio verbi, de sacramento intelli- 
gentibus. Postremo sanctus iste sacerdos, ut quam 
castus ipse sit, conjecturam prsebeat, tanquam errorem 
summum, et summam crecitatem ponit, et Captivitatem 
maximam, quod sibi sacerdotes indixerint coelibem casti- 
tatem. Et quum Christus eos laudet eximie, qui se 
castraverunt ob regnum ccelorum, Antichristus iste 
spurcissimus eosdem comparat eviratis olim Cybelis dese 
sacerdotibus idolatris. Jamdudum scio, aures pii lec- 
toris exhorrerit impium hunc dogmatum perniciosorum 

398 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

Priests of the Heathen Sybils. I know that this Cata 
logue of pernicious Opinions has long since wearied the 
Ears of the pious Reader ; every one of which Opinions 
is more stuffed with Heresies, than the Trojan s Horse 
is reported to have been with armed Men. 

But his denying Orders to be a Sacrament, is as it 
were the Fountain to all the rest; which, being once 
stopped up, the other small Springs must of Necessity 
become dry of themselves. This Sacrament (says he) 
is not known to the Church of Christ, but has been in 
vented by the Church of the Pope/ In these few 
Words, are contained a great Heap of Absurdities and 
Lyes: For he makes Distinction between Christ s 
Church, and the Pope s] whereas the Pope is Christ s 
Vicar, in that, over which Christ is the Head. He says 
the Church has invented; when it has received it as 
already instituted, and therefore has not invented it. 
This Sacrament (he says) is unknown to the Church 
of Christ: Whereas it is most certain, that all Parts of 
the World, which have the true Faith of Christ, have 
Orders for a Sacrament: For if he could find some ob 
scure Corner, (which I doubt he cannot) in which this 
Sacrament of Orders should not be known ; yet ought not 
that Corner to be compared to the rest of the whole 
Church; which not only is subject to Christ, but also, 
for Christ s Sake, to Christ s only Vicar the Pope of 
Rome, and believes Orders to be a Sacrament. 

Otherwise, if Luther persists in his Distinction of the 
Pope s Church, from Christ s-, and in saying that the 
one has Orders for a Sacrament, the other not ; let him 
shew us the Church of Christ, which, contrary to the 
Faith of the Papal Church, (as he calls it) knows not 
the Sacrament of Order. In the mean while, it appears 
evidently, that, by asserting this Sacrament to be un 
known to the Church of Christ, and that they are not 

De Sacramento Ordinis 399 

catalogum, quorum fere quodvis magis foetum est hsere- 
sibus, quam fuisse fertur equus ille Trojanus armatis. 
Sed omnium veluti quidam fons est, quod Ordinem 
negat esse sacramentum, quo obstructo cseteros necesse 
est rivulos exarescere. 

"Hoc sacramentum," inquit, "Ecclesia Christ! igno- 
rat, inventumque est ab Ecclesia Papae." Hsec pauca 
verba non parvum habent et falsitatis et absurditatis 
acervum : nam et Ecclesiam Papa3 discernit ab Ecclesia 
Christi, quum Papa sit ejusdem Ecclesise Pontifex, 
cujus et Christus. Ait Ecclesiam invenisse quod non 
invenit, sed accepit institutum. Ait Ecclesiam Christi 
hoc ignorare sacramentum, quum satis constet nullam 
fere mundi plagam esse, quse rite prontetur fidem 
Christi, quin Ordinem habeat pro sacramento. Nam si 
posset obscurum aliquem angulum reperire (quod, 
opinor, non potest) in quo nesciatur sacramentum 
Ordinis, tamen angulus ille non esset cum reliqua com- 
parandus Ecclesia, quse non Christo solum subest, sed et 
propter Christum unico Christi vicario Papse Romano, 
et Ordinem credit esse sacramentum. Alioqui si perstet 
in eo Lutherus, ut Ecclesiam Papse discernat ab Ec 
clesia Christi, et apud alteram dicat Ordinem haberi 
pro sacramento, non haberi apud alteram, proferat illam 
Ecclesiam Christi, quse contra fidem papalis, ut vocat, 
Ecclesise, ignorat sacramentum Ordinis. Interim certe 
perspicuum est, quum dicat hoc sacramentum ignorari 
ab Ecclesia Christi, et de Christi Ecclesia dicat eos, 
quibus prassidet Papa, non esse, utraque ratione ab 
Ecclesia Christi eum segregare non Romam tantum, sed 
Italiam totam, Germaniam, Hispanias, Gallias, Britan- 
nias, reliquasque gentes omnes qusecumque Romano 

400 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

of Christ s Church who are governed by the Pope; he 
separates, by both these Reasons, from Christ s Church, 
not only Rome, but also all Italy, Germany, Spain, 
France, Britain, and all other Nations, which obey the 
See of Rome; or have Orders for a Sacrament. Which 
People, being by him taken from the Church of Christ; 
it consequently follows, that he must either confess 
Christ s Church to be in no Place at all, or else, like 
the Donatists, he must reduce the Catholic Church to 
two or three Heretics whispering in a Corner. 

But he draws out of his Shaft, as an inevitable Dart, 
That Grace is in no Place promised to this Sacrament; 
and that the New Testament makes not the least Men 
tion of it: He says, That it is a ridiculous Thing to 
assert that for the Sacrament of God, which cannot any 
where be demonstrated to have been instituted by God. 
Nor is it lawful (says he) to assert any Thing to be of 
Divine Institution, which is not of Divine Ordinance; 
but we ought (says he) to endeavour to have all Things 
confirmed to us from clear Scripture. 

We will see, by and by, whether no Mention is made 
at all of this Sacrament in the New Testament : For by 
the same Dart he expects to wound all the rest of the 
Sacraments ; against which Dart, I will take the same 
Buckler or Shield which Luther himself confesses to be 

His own Words are these : Truly the Church has this 
Faculty, That it can discern the Word of God, from 
the Word of Men ; even as St. Augustine confesses, 
That he has believed the Gospel by the Motion of the 
Church s Authority; which told him that it was the 
Gospel. Wherefore, seeing that the Church, as Luther 
confesses, can discern the Word of God, from the Word 
of Men; it is certain it has not that Power, but from 
God ; nor for any other Cause, than that it may not err 

De Sacramento Ordinis 401 

Pontifici parent, aut Ordinem pro sacramento recipiunt. 
Quos populos onrnes quum de Christ! tollat Ecclesia, 
necesse est ut aut Ecclesiam Christ! fateatur esse nus- 
quam, aut, more Donatistarum, Ecclesiam Christi ca- 
tholicam ad duos aut tres hsereticos redigat de Christo 
susurrantes in angulo. 

Sed velut inevitabile telum promit, quod hoc sacra- 
mentum nullam habeat promissionem gratise ullibi, ut 
inquit, positam: cujus sacramenti vel verbo meminisse 
negat totum Novum Testamentum, et ridiculum ait 
asserere pro sacramento Dei quod a Deo institutum nus- 
quam potest monstrari ; "nee licet," inquit, "adstruere 
aliquod divinitus ordinatum, quod divinitus ordinatum 
non est, sed conandum est ut omnia nobis claris," inquit, 
"Scripturis sint firmata." Utrum in Novo Testamento 
nulla prorsus fiat hujus sacramenti mentio, post ex- 
cutiemus. Interim sic agam cum illo, tanquam nulla 
prorsus mentio fieret: nam eodem telo se sperat omnia 
ferme sacramenta perfodere; adversus quod telum ego 
in scutum mihi idipsum ferrum conjiciam, quod 
Lutherus ipse fatetur impenetrabile. Sic enim se 
habent ipsius verba: a Hoc sane habet Ecclesia, quod 
potest discernere verbum Dei a verbis hominum, sicut 
Augustinus confitetur se evangelio credidisse, motum 
auctoritate Ecclesise, quse hoc esse evangelium prsedica- 
bat." Igitur quum istud habeat, ut Lutherus fatetur, 
Ecclesia, quod verbum Dei discernere potest a verbis 
hominurn, certum est istud non aliunde haberi, quam a 
Deo, nee ob aliam causam, quam ne in his erraret Ec 
clesia, in quibus non erratum esse oporteat. Sequitur 
igitur ex hoc fundamento, quod nobis substravit Luthe- 

402 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

in those Things, in which there ought to be no Error. 
It follows then, out of this Foundation he has laid for 
us, that the Church has from God, not only the Power 
of discerning God s Word from that of Mens, (which 
he allows) but also the Faculty of discerning betwixt 
divine and human Sense of Scripture. Otherwise, what 
should it avail the Church to know, by God s Teaching, 
the true Scripture from that which is false, if it could 
not distinguish between the false and true Sense of true 
Scripture ? Finally, it follows, by the same Reason, 
that God instructs his Church, even in Things which are 
not written ; lest it might, through Errors, embrace false 
Things for true ones: For that is no less dangerous 
than that it might admit the Writings of Men, for the 
Words of God, or draw a false Sense out of the Word of 
God; especially if it should take false Sacraments for 
true ones, and human Traditions for divine; nay, not 
only the Traditions of Men, but the Inventions of the 
Devil; if the Church of Christ, should, as Inchanters 
do, place its Hope in feigned and vain Signs of corporal 
Things. It appears, therefore, by Luther s confessing 
the Church to have a Faculty of discerning the Words 
of God from the Words of Men, that it has no less 
Power to discern betwixt divine Institutions, and the 
Traditions of Men. For, otherwise, the Error which 
we are to avoid, might as well arise from the one Side, 
as from the other. And Christ s Care, is not, that his 
Church may not err, after this or that Manner ; but that 
it may not err in any Manner whatsoever. But it could 
by no Error commit a greater Injury to Christ, than in 
putting its Trust, which it ought to have in him alone, 
in Signs not supported by any Grace, but empty and 
void of all the Advantages of Faith. Therefore, the 
Church cannot err about the Sacraments of Faith; no 
more, I say, than in admitting Scripture, (in which 

De Sacramento Ordinis 403 

ms, ut Ecclesia habeat a Deo non id solum quod con- 
cedit Lutherus, discretionem verborum Dei a verbis 
hominum, sed etiam discernendi facultatem, qua in 
Scripturis divinis divinum sensum ab humano dis- 
criminet. Alioqui enim quid profuerit si Ecclesia, Deo 
docente, Scripturam veram discernat a falsa, et in 
Scriptura vera f alsum sensum non discernat a vero ? 
Denique eadem ratione et istud sequitur, ut et in his 
quse non scribuntur, Ecclesiam suam doceat Deus, ne 
per errorem possit falsa pro veris amplecti, quum ex ea 
re non minus impendeat periculi, quam si vel Scripturas 
hominum teneat pro verbis Dei, vel e veris Dei verbis 
f alsum eliciat sensum: prsesertim si falsa suscipiat 
sacramenta pro veris, et traditiones hominum pro tradi- 
tionibus Dei, imo non traditiones hominum, sed fig- 
menta diaboli, si suam spem in fictis ac vanis corpora- 
Hum rerum signis, quemadmodum magi faciunt, Ec 
clesia Christi velut in Christi sacramentis collocet. 

Liquet ergo manifeste ex eo quod fatetur Lutherus 
Ecclesiam hoc habere, ut verba Dei discernat a verbis 
hominum, hoc quoque non minus habere, ut traditiones 
Dei discernat a traditionibus hominum, quum alioqui 
utrobique possit ex sequo vitandus error exoriri, nee id 
agat Christus, ne Ecclesia sua hoc aut illo erret modo, 
sed ne erret ullo. Errare vero majore cum injuria 
Christi non possit, quam si fiduciam in illo ponendam 
solo ponat in signis nulla prorsus fultis gratia, sed omni 
bono fidei vacuis atque inanibus. ISTon igitur errare 
potest Ecclesia in suscipiendis sacramentis fidei, non 
magis, inquam, quam errare potest in suscipiendis (qua 
in re Ecclesiam errare non posse fatetur Lutherus ipse) 
Scripturis. Quse res si se haberet aliter, multa seque- 
rentur absurda, sed hoc imprimis, quo nihil esse potest 

404 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

LutJier confesses her infallible) which, if it were other 
wise, many Absurdities should follow; and especially 
this, that almost all Opinions of the Church, in Matters 
of Faith, established these many past Ages, may be dis 
puted after the Fancy of every new-fangled Heretic; 
which were the most ridiculous Thing imaginable. For, 
if Nothing must be certainly believed, but what is con 
firmed by Scripture; and that (as he says) by clear 
Testimonies of Scripture too ; we must not only, not 
assert the perpetual Virginity of the blessed Virgin 
Mary, but also an inexhausted Materia will be fur 
nished for battering the Church, at the Pleasure of every 
one w r ho is minded to stir up new Sects, or renew the 
old one : For, there have been at any Time few or no 
Heretics, who would not pretend to Scripture, every one 
disputing their new-broached Opinions to be confirmed 
by Scripture; or, (however agreeable to Scripture, be 
cause the contrary was not therein defined) disputing, 
that what was alledged against their Sects, was other 
wise to be understood, than as the orthodox Church un 
derstood it : And lest it might be clearly brought against 
them, they either forged another Sense, or preferred 
some other Passages of Scripture, which seemed con 
trary to the former ; troubling all Things in such Man 
ner, as to make them seem ambiguous. If the public 
Faith of the Church had not withstood Arrius, the 
Heretic, I know not if he should ever have wanted a 
Subject of Dispute out of Scripture. 

Now, seeing we have proved, by Luther s own Funda 
mentals, that the Sacraments believed by the Church 
could not be instituted but by God himself, though Noth 
ing were read thereof in Scripture : Let us see whether 
Scripture makes not some Mention of this Sacrament. 
x\ll Men do unanimously confess, (Luther only ex- 
cepted) that the Apostles were by our Saviour ordained 

De Sacramento Ordinis 405 

absurdius, quod pleraque omnia fidei Christianas dog 
mata, tot stabilita sseculis, ad succrescentium hsereti- 
corum libidinem denuo revocarentur in dubium. Nam 
si nihil haberi pro certo debet, nisi quod Scripturis et 
iisdem, ut Lutherus ait, claris firmatum est, non solum 
non asseremus divse Marise virginitatem perpetuam, sed 
et inexhausta suggeretur fidei oppugnandse materia, si 
cui unquam libeat aut novas excitare sectas, aut ressus- 
citare sepultas. Nam paucissimi fuerunt hseretici, qui 
non receperint Scripturas; sed omnes fere ex eo sua 
statuebant dogmata, quod aut ea contenderent esse fir- 
mata Scripturis, aut, quum illis viderentur rationi con- 
sentanea, contrarium non definiri Scripturis: quoniam 
ea, quse proponebantur adversus suam sectam, aliter con- 
tendebant intelligi, quam orthodoxa intelligebat Ec- 
clesia, et, ne clara dici possent, aut alio excogitato sensu, 
aut prolatis aliunde ex eadem Scriptura locis, in 
speciem valde contrariis, omnia sic turbarunt, ut 
viderentur ambigua. Itaque adversus Arium, nisi pub- 
lica stetisset fides Ecclesise, baud scio an defuisset un- 
quani de Scripturis disputandi materia. 

Nunc, quoniam ex ipsius Lutheri fundamento pro- 
bavimus sacramenta, quse credit Ecclesia, non aliunde 
quam a Deo potuisse constitui, etiamsi nihil inde prorsus 
in Scriptura legeretur, videamus an Scriptura tarn nul- 
lam omnino mentionem faciat hujus sacramenti. 
Omnes una voce fatentur Apostolos in Ccena Domini 
ordinatos in sacerdotes. Solus istud Lutherus negat, 

406 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

Priests, at his last Supper; where it plainly appears, 
that Power was given them to consecrate the Body of 
Christ, which Power the Priest alone hath. But, says 
Luther, it is not a Sacrament, because there is no Grace 
promised therein. But pray, how, or whence has he 
this Knowledge ? Because (says he) it is not read in 
Scripture ! This is his usual Consequence : It is not 
written in the Gospels, therefore has it not been done 
by Christ: Which Form of reasoning the Evangelist 
overthrows, when he says, Many Things were done, 
which are not written in this Book.* But let us touch 
Luther yet a little closer. He confesses that the Euchar 
ist is a Sacrament ; and he were mad, if he did not ; but 
where, pray, does he find in Scripture, that Grace is 
promised in that Sacrament ? For he admits Nothing 
but Scripture, and that clear Scripture too. Let him 
read the Passages that treat of our Lord s Supper, and 
see if he can find in any of the Evangelists, that Grace 
is promised in the receiving of the Blessed Sacrament. 
We read that Christ said, This is my Blood, which shall 
be shed for many, to the Remission of Sins;-\ whereby 
he signified, that he should redeem Mankind by his 
Passion upon the Cross. But when he said, This do in 
Remembrance of me:\ He promises no Grace, or Re 
mission of Sins, to him that does this; that is, to the 
consecrated Priests, or to him that receives the 
Eucharist. NOT doth the Apostle, in his Epistle to the 
Corinthians, when he threatens Judgment to them that 
unworthily receive, make Mention of any Grace to him 
that receives it worthily. If any Thing in the 6th of 
St. John promise Grace to him that receives the Sacra 
ment of our Lord s Body and Blood; yet can that make 
Nothing for Luther, because he denies the whole Chap 
ter to have any Reference at all to the Eucharist : You 
*Jolm xxii. 25. fMatt. xxvi. 28. JI. Cor. xi. 24. 

De Sacramento Ordinis 407 

quum plane constet illic datam potestatem conficiendi 
corporis Christi, quod solus conficere sacerdos potest. 
"At non est," inquit ille, "sacramentum, quia non fuit 
illis ulla promissa gratia." Unde id novit Lutherus? 
"Quia non legitur," inquit. Familiaris est ista Luthero 
consequent! a : Non est in Evangelio scriptum ; ergo non 
est a Christo f actum : quam colligendi f ormam infirmat 
Evangelista, quum dicit: "Multa sunt facta, quce non 
sunt scripta in libro hoc/ Sed tangemus tamen Luthe- 
rum aliquando propius. Eucharistiam concedit esse 
sacramentum : quod nisi fateretur, insaniret. At ubi 
reperit in Scriptura promissam in illo sacramento gra- 
tiam ? Nam ille nihil recipit, nisi Scripturas, et easdem 
claras. Legatur locus de Coena dominica: non reperiet 
apud ullum evangelistarum in susceptione sacramenti 
promissam gratiam. Legitur a Christo dictum: "Hie 
est sanguis meus novi testamenti, qui pro multis effun- 
detur in remissionem peccatorum :" quibus verbis 
significavit semet in cruce per Passionem redempturum 
genus humanum. Sed quum dixit ante : "Hoc facite in 
meam commemorationem" nullam hoc facienti, id est 
sacerdoti consecranti, aut Eucharistiam recipienti gra 
tiam ibi promittit, nullam peccatorum remissionem. At 
nee Apostolus in epistola ad Corinthios, quum inter- 
minetur male manducantibus judicium, ullam mentio- 
nem f acit de gratia bene manducantium. Quod si quid, 
ex capite sexto Joannis, gratiam promittat suscipienti 
sacramentum carnis et sanguinis Domini, ne id quidem 
quicquam juvare Lutherum potest, quippe qui totum 
illud caput negat ad Eucharistiam quicquam perti- 

Videtis ergo ut istam promissionem gratise, quam pro 
totius sacramenti fundamento magnifice nobis in toto 

408 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

see here, very plainly, that he cannot maintain that 
Promise of Grace, which he so fairly promised us, in his 
whole Work, as the sole Basis of the Sacrament, and in 
that only Sacrament which he admits; unless, besides 
the Words of Scripture, he has recourse (as it is neces 
sary for him) to the Faith of the Church. 

Wherefore; as it is sufficient for us to read in the 
Gospel, that the Power of consecrating the Sacrament, 
was given them to whom the Priests succeed; so is it 
likewise enough, that we read the Council of the Apostle 
to Timothy, That he impose not Hands rashly upon 
any one. ? Which Passage plainly demonstrates, that the 
Ordination of Priests is not performed by the Consent 
of the Laity, (by which alone Luther affirms, that a 
Priest may be ordained,) but by the Ordination of a 
Bishop only: and that by a certain Imposition of 
Hands ; in which God, through the exterior Sign, should 
infuse an interior Grace. Concerning which Grace, 
why should we not believe the Church of the Living 
God ? which is, as the Apostle saith, The Ground and 
Pillar of Truth;* for Luther himself must certainly be 
lieve her concerning the Grace promised in the Euchar 
ist; as the Promise of that Grace, or the giving of it 
without any Promise, is known in this Faith of the 

Indeed I admire that any one should be so distracted 
as to doubt, whether Grace is given by the Sacrament 
of Orders to the Priest of the Gospel ; whereas we may 
read many Places, that seem to signify that Grace was 
conferred on the Priests of the old Law; and that God 
saith, You shall anoint and sanctify Aaron and his Sons, 
that they may exercise to me the Office of Priesthood. [ 
Otherwise, what should this exterior Sanctification have 
signified for the Honour of God, if God had not likewise 
*I. Tim. iii. 15. fExod. xxviii. 1. 

De Sacramento Ordinis 409 

promisit opere, non potest in eo tueri sacramento, quod 
fere solum relinquit, nisi, quod necesse habet, praeter 
Scripturse verba recurrat ad Ecclesise fidem. Igitur 
quemadmodum satis est nobis quod in Evangelio legi- 
mus conficiendi sacramenti potestatem commissam his 
in quorum locum succedunt sacerdotes, ita satis est quod 
ab Apostolo legimus consilium datum Timotheo, ut 
nemini cito manum imponeret: quse loca plane signifi 
cant ordinationem sacerdotum, non consensu communi- 
tatis, quo solo interveniente fieri sacerdotum posse 
Lutherus ait, sed sola ordinatione episcopi, idque certa 
impositione manuum, in qua per exterius signum Deus 
inf underet interiorem gratiam : de qua gratia quid obstat 
quominus credamus Ecclesise Dei vivi, quse "est" ut 
ait Apostolus, "columna et firmamentum veritatis" 
quando eidem Ecclesise necesse est ipse credat Lutherus 
de gratia promissa in sacramento Eucharistise. Nam in 
hac fide cognoscitur, aut illius gratise promissio, aut 
certe sine prornissione donatio. 

Demiror profecto tarn vecordem esse quemquam ut 
dubitet an sacerdotibus evangelicis in Ordine conferatur 
gratia, quum passim legantur plurima quse significare 
videntur etiain veteris legis sacerdotibus gratiam esse 
collatam. Nam: "Aaron" inquit Deus, "ei filios ejus 
unges; sanctificabis eos, ut sacerdotio fungantur mihi." 
Alioqui enim, quid profuisset exterior sanctificatio in 
cultum Dei, nisi Deus pariter infudisset gratiam, qua 
sanctificarentur interius ? atque id quoque per Chris 
tum, cujus venturi fides robur et vim potuit indidisse 

410 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

infused Grace, by which they should be likewise in 
teriorly sanctified; and that also through Christ; the 
Faith of whose coming, gave Force and Strength to 
precedent Sacraments, even as it made the Jews capable 
of obtaining eternal Salvation ? 

But if any one will not admit, that Grace was con 
ferred to the Priesthood of the Old Law ; yet has he no 
Reason to deny the Infusion of Grace into the Priests 
of the Evangelical Law : Because now, through the Pas 
sion of Christ the Fullness of Grace is come. In the 
Acts of the Apostles, when St. Paul and Barnabas were 
set apart for that Work, to which the Holy Ghost has 
called them,* they were not sent away, before they were 
first ordained by Imposition of Hands. But pray, why 
did the Apostles lay Hands on them ? Was it to touch 
their Bodies in a vain Manner, without profiting their 
Souls by spiritual Grace ? How then dares Luther af 
firm, that this Sacrament was unknown to the Church of 
Christ, which was used by the Apostles? But (says 
he) it was never called a Sacrament by any of the 
antient Doctors, except Dyonisius; for we read nothing 
at all in the other Fathers, of these Sacraments, neither 
did they think on the Name of Sacrament, whenever 
they spoke of these Things ; for the Invention of Sacra 
ments is new/ (says he.) An excellent Reason of Lu 
ther s I must confess, yet altogether false ; and if it was 
true, yet could it avail nothing for his Purpose. For if 
the Antients had not writ at all, of a Thing perhaps 
never disputed amongst them; or if, when they did 
write of it, they should signify it by its proper Name, and 
not by that common Name of Sacrament ; should it then 
follow, as a necessary Consequence, that there has been 
no Order at all, or that it was not a Sacrament ? For 
if any Body should call Baptism by the proper Name 
*Acts xiii. 

De Sacramento Ordinis 411 

sacramentis prsecedentibus, sicut capacem fecit populum 
judaicum consequendse aliquando salutis seternse? 
Verum si quis id non admittat, veteris legis sacerdotio 
collatam gratiam, certe non est cur gravetur tamen ad- 
mittere gratiam sacerdotibus evangelicse legis in- 
fundi, quia jam per Christi Passionem venit plenitude 

In Actis apostolorum, quum Barnabas ac Paulus 
segregarentur in opus in quod eos Spiritus sanctus 
accersivit, non ante dimissi sunt, quam impositis mani- 
bus ordinati sunt. At cur, obsecro, manus eis imposue- 
runt apostoli ? An ut corpus inani tactu pulsarent, nulla 
spiritali gratia prodessent animse ? Quomodo potest 
ergo Lutherus hoc sacramentum dicere Ecclesise Christi 
esse incognitum, quo nulla natio Christiana non utitur ? 
Quomodo potest appellare novum quod instituit Chris- 
tus, quod in usu habebant apostoli ? a At nunquam/ 7 
inquit, appellatum est sacramentum apud veteres Doc- 
tores usquam, excepto Dionysio. Nihil enim prorsus in 
reliquis Patribus de istis sacramentis legimus," inquit, 
a nec sacramenti nomine censuerunt, quoties de his rebus 
locuti sunt. Recens enim est inventio sacramentorum." 
Egregia sane ratio est ista Lutheri, quse et manifesto 
falsa est, et, si foret vera, nihil tamen efficeret: nam si 
veteres de re fortassis olim non controversa nihil scrip- 
sissent omnino, aut si, quum scriberent aliquid, rem 
proprio tamen, non communi sacramentorum nomine 
designassent, non necessario colligeretur ex eo aut Ordi- 
nem non fuisse prorsus, aut non fuisse sacramentum. 
Kam si quis Baptismum vocet Baptismum, nee addat 
sacramentum, dicetur ideo non habuisse Baptismum pro 
Sacramento ? 

412 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

of Baptism, and should not add the Word Sacrament; 
shall it be therefore said, that he does not think Bap 
tism to be a Sacrament ? Moreover, if Dyonisius only, 
amongst all the holy Fathers, should write Orders to be 
a Sacrament, that alone should be sufficient to destroy 
Luther s Objection ; by which he intends to make People 
believe, that the Invention of Sacraments is new; for 
this Novelty is contradicted by his confessing it to be 
written by him, whom he acknowledges to be antient: 
And this would be true, though St. Dyonisius were such 
a Man, as sacrilegious Luther feigns him to be, saying, 
That he had almost no solid Learning in him: That 
none of the Things he writ in his ecclesiastical Hier 
archy, are proved by Authority, or Reason; but that 
they are all his own Inventions, and much like Dreams : 
That in his mystical Divinity, which some ignorant 
Divines (says Luther) so much extoll; he is pernicious; 
more like a Platonist than a Christian : In which (says 
he) you will not only, not learn who is Christ; but if 
you had known it before, you should lose your Belief 
of him: I speak (says he) by Experience; (By the Ex 
periment, I suppose, of losing Christ there himself. ) 
And further; Pray what performs he in his ecclesi 
astical Hierarchy, but only describes allegorically some 
ecclesiastical Rites f Finally, that he might shew in 
how light a Matter St. Dyonisius lost his Labour, Do 
you think (says he) it should be difficult for me to sport 
with Allegories in whatsoever is credited ? It should 
not be any hard Work for me to write a better Hierarchy 
than that of Dyonisius is. Who can patiently endure 
to see the pious Labours of the holy Man so much abused 
by this J angler, as if he were raging against some 
Heretic like himself? For he calls him illiterate and 
foolish, and one that writes not only Dreams, but also 
pernicious Doctrines, destroying Christ! All which Re- 

De Sacramento Ordinis 413 

Prseterea si solus ex antiquis Patribus Dionysius 
Ordinem scriberet esse sacramentum, vel satis esset ad 
evertendam Luther i objectionem, qua videri vult in- 
ventionem sacramentorum novam esse: repugnat enim 
esse novum quod ab illo fatetur scriptis comprehensum, 
quern fatetur antiquum. Atque istud quidem verum 
esset etiam, si talis esset sacer Dionysius, qualem eum 
depingit sacrilegus Lutherus, qui ferme nihil in eo dicit 
esse solidse eruditionis, nihil eorum quse scribit, aut 
auctoritate quicquarn, aut ratione probari, sed omnia 
esse illius meditata ac prope somniis simillima quse- 
cumque in coelesti scribit Hierarchia. a ln Theologia 
mystica, quam sic inflant," inquit, a ignorantissimi 
quidam theologistse, est," inquit, "etiam perniciosissi- 
mus, plus platonizans, quam christianizans. In qua," 
inquit, "Christum adeo non disces, ut, etiamsi scias, 

"Expertus," inquit, "loquor:" hoc est, ut opinor, 
expertus est ibi se Christum perdidisse. "De- 
mum in ecclesiastica Hierarchia quid facit," inquit, 
a nisi quod ritus quosdam ecclesiasticos describit, ludens 
allegoriis ?" Denique ut ostenderet in re quam levi 
divus Dionysius luderet operam: "An mihi putas," in- 
quit, "difficile esse in qualibet re creata allegoriis 
ludere? Mihi non fuerit operosum meliorem Hierar- 
chiam scribere quam Dionysii sit." Quis patienter ferat 
in viri sancti pios labores sic debacchantem rabulam, 
quse vere meritoque in sui similem baccharetur hsereti- 
cum ? 

Nam et indoctum vocat, et ludicrum, et scriben- 
tem non tantum somnia, sed etiam perniciosa, et Chris 
tum destruentia dogmata. Quse tamen omnia convitia 
sancto viro cedunt in gloriam, cujus opera ornnia vel 
hoc abunde demonstrat esse bona, quod viro malo dis- 
pliceant. Nam quae consortia luci cum tenebris, Christo 

414 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

preaches, are, notwithstanding, to the Glory of the holy 
Man, whose Works are all sufficiently demon stiated to 
be good, by their displeasing only a Man so wicked as 
this. For what Agreement can there be betwixt Light 
and Darkness, between Christ and Belial? His own 
wicked Brain was the Cause that he gained no Good by 
the pious Books of this holy Man: For Horatius writ 
truly ; Unless the Vessel be sweet, whatsoever you put 
therein will become sour. 7 In as much as he says, He 
could write a better Hierarchy, than that of St. Dyoni 
sius/ pray let him brag of it when he has done it. In 
the mean while, he undertakes a Thing much more diffi 
cult, when he goes about to demolish that Hierarchy 
which is founded upon a solid Rock. 

The Indignation we have conceived at that impious 
Fellow s casting such injurious Reproaches against the 
holy Man, has caused us somewhat to digress. But, as 
I begun to say, though St. Dyonisius had been the Man 
that had taught holy Orders to have been a Sacrament ; 
yet that is, however, sufficient to convince Luther, when 
he asserts the Invention of the Sacraments to be but a 
new Thing ; since he not only confesses Dyonisius to be 
antient, but also that all the Christian World honours 
him for a Saint. So that Luther s Anger against him, is 
caused merely through Malice, which suffers him to 
brook nothing contrary to his wicked Heresies. 

But now, that his Vanity in every Place may the more 
plainly appear ; I will shew, that not only St. Dyonisius, 
but also St. Gregory, and St. Augustine, (whom he 
falsely calls his Patron,) take Orders for a Sacrament. 
Moreover, this indefaceable Character (by him derided) 
though not called by that very Name; yet St. Hierom, 
in the Sacrament of Baptism, writes plainly enough of 
the Thing itself, to which also St. Augustine has had 
Regard, both in the Sacraments of Baptism and Orders. 

De Sacramento Ordinis 415 

cum Beliali ? At quod e piis viri sancti libellis nihil 
pietatis hausit, impium ipsius caput erat in causa, 
quando quidem vere scribit Horatius : 

"Sincerum est nisi vas, quodcumque infundis, acescit." 

quod ait sibi non operosum esse meliorem Hier- 
archiam scribere, quam fuerit ilia Dionysii, postquain 
scripserit, turn, istud jactitet. Interea vero rem ag- 
greditur multo magis operosam, Hierarchiam alteram, 
quae supra firmam fundata est petram, demoliri. 

Longius aliquanto nos avexit indignatio, qua moleste 
ferimus in virum sanctum ab impio evomita tarn con- 
tumeliosa convitia. Verum, ut coepi dicere, etiamsi 
solus Dionysius docuisset Ordinem esse sacramentum, 
suffecisset illud ad revincendum Lutherum asserentem 
novam esse inventionem sacramentorum, quum Diony- 
sium non solum Lutherus fateatur antiquum, sed et 
totus orbis Christianus veneretur ut sanctum. Cui quod 
Lutherus irascitur, non aliud facit, quam sola malitia, 
qua nihil ferre potest quod impiis ipsius hseresibus ad- 
versatur. At nunc, ut plane liqueat quam vanus un- 
dique sit Lutherus, ostendam non solum Dionysium, sed 
etiam Gregorium, et, quern sibi patronum Lutherus 
mentitur, Augustinum Ordinem habuisse pro sacra- 
mento; prseterea characterem, quern Lutherus irridet, 
indelebilem, etiamsi non vocetur nomine, re tamen 
aperte describi et ab Hieronymo in sacramento Baptis- 
matis, et rationem ejus haberi ab Augustino in utroque 
sacramento tarn Baptismi, quam Ordinis. 

416 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

I will therefore begin with St. Hierom, of the Char 
acter of Baptism, that the Character of Orders may 
more evidently appear; which for its Indebility, both 
St. Augustine and St. Gregory compare with the Sacra 
ment of Orders. St. Hierom, therefore, on these Words 
of St. Paul to the Epliesians, (Do not contristate the 
holy Spirit of God, in which you were signed in the Day 
of Redemption.,)* writes thus, But we have been signed 
with the Holy Ghost, that our Spirit and Soul may be 
sealed with the Signet of God, and that we may receive 
that Image and Similitude, after which we were first 
created. This Seal of the Holy Ghost, according to the 
Words of our Saviour, is stamped by God himself : For, 
says he, This has God the Father signed : f And a little 
after, He is therefore signed, that he may keep the 
Seal ; and that he may, in the Day of Redemption, shew 
it pure, sincere, and unchanged : that therefore he may 
receive his Reward with those who are redeemed. 7 
Amongst all those, who have ever writ of the Character 
of Sacraments, none could have more plainly expressed 
the Character, whereby God Almighty signs the Soul 
through the Sacraments, than St. Hierom has done in 
these Words; not by human Fiction (as Luther, that 
execrable Scoffer of Sacraments, feigns,) but by solid 
Testimonies of holy Scriptures. 

For a Character is that Quality of the Soul, which 
God Almighty, (best known to himself, and to us in 
scrutable,) doth impress as a Seal, whereby to know his 
own Flock from Strangers: Which Character, though 
they stain it with Vices, and turn it from White to 
Black, from Perfect to Imperfect, from most Pure to 
Impure ; yet can they never so raze it out, but that in the 
Day of Judgment, those therewith signed, will be known 
to all the World, to be of his Flock, who has marked 
*Ephes. iv. 30. fJohn vi. 27. 

De Sacramento Ordinis 41Y 

Incipiain igitur a Hieronymo de charactere Baptis- 
matis, ut appareat manifestius character Ordinis, quern 
et Augustinus, et Gregorius ob indelebilem characterem 
cum Baptismo comparant. Igitur super ilia Pauli verba 
ad Ephesios : "Nolite contristari Spiritum sanctum Dei, 
in quo signati estis in diem redemptionis," Hieronymus 
in hunc scribit modum: "Signati autem sumus Spiritu 
Dei sancto, ut et spiritus noster, et anima imprimatur 
signaculo Dei, et illam recipiamus imaginem et simili- 
tudinem, ad quam in exordio conditi sumus. Hoc 
signaculum sancti Spiritus juxta eloquium Salvatoris 
Deo imprimente signatur: Hunc enim" ait, "signavit 
Pater Deus" Et paulo post: a ldcirco signatur," in- 
quit, a ut servet signaculum, et ostendat illud in die re 
demptionis purum, atque sincerum, et nulla ex parte 
mutilatum, et ob id remunerari valeat cum his qui re- 
dempti sunt." Quicumque scripsere de sacramentorum 
charactere nullis unquam verbis apertius expressere 
characterem, quern anima? per sacr amenta imprimit 
Deus, quam verbis his beatus expressit Hieronymus, non 
liumano figmento, ut Lutherus fingit sacramentorum ex- 
secrandus irrisor, sed solidis Scripturse sacrse testi- 
moniis. Character enim est ilia qualitas animse, quam 
Deus sibi notam, nobis incogitabilem imprimit in signa 
culum, quo suum gregein discernit ab alienis, quod 
signaculum, etiamsi vitiis maculent, et e candido red- 
el ant atrum, ex integro mutilum, e purissimo reddant 
irnpurum, nunquam tamen ita poterunt eradere, quin 
illo characteris impressi signaculo, in cujus gregeni 
signati sint, orbi toti maneant in judicii die cognosci- 
biles. ISTec alia ratione tarn constantor observat Ecclesia, 
ut quum alia sacramenta toties iteret (quod in Eucha- 
ristise sumptione facit ac Pcenitentia, Gonjugio, et Unc- 
tione languentium), Baptisma, Confirmationem atque 
Ordinem nunquam iterari permittat. In iis enim sacra- 

418 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

them with that Signet : Which is the only Reason, why 
the Church so constantly observes; that, whereas she 
renews so often other Sacraments, as the Eucharist, 
Penance, Marriage, Extreme Unction; yet never suffers 
Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Orders to be renewed ; 
having learned from the Holy Ghost, that the Seal of the 
Character is imprinted in these Sacraments, so that it 
cannot be defaced, therefore ought not to be iterated. 

But that it may more evidently appear, that Orders 
are, in this Case, like to Baptism ; let us hear St. Greg 
ory, It is (says he) a ridiculous Thing to say, that he 
who has received Holy Orders, ought to receive them 
again ; for, as he who has once been baptized, ought not 
to be baptized again; so he, who has been once conse 
crated, ought not again to be consecrated in the same 
Degree of Orders. You see that the Church suffers not 
the Sacrament of Orders to be iterated, any more than 
that of Baptism, by Reason of its indelible Character. 
But to shut Luther s Mouth, who calls that Character a 
feigned Thing, and that St. Dyonisius was the only 
Man, of all the antient Fathers, that catted Holy Orders 
a Sacrament: We will, as we have promised, give you St. 
Augustine s Words; who, in treating of Baptism and 
Holy Orders, speaks thus; They are both Sacraments, 
and given to Man after certain Consecration ; the one at 
his Baptism, the other when he receives Holy Orders: 
Therefore it is not lawful in the Holy Catholic Church 
to iterate either of them. For when any heretical Min 
ister is received into the Church, for the Good of Peace ; 
if, after the Error of Schism is corrected, it should 
seem necessary, he should exercise the same Office, which 
he had before : Yet is he not to be ordained again ; for, 
as Baptism remains intire in them, so Orders also; be 
cause the Vice consisted in the Separation, not in the 
Sacraments, which are the same, where-ever they are: 

De Sacramento Ordinis 419 

mentis, sancto docente Spiritu, didicit Ecclesia charac- 
teris conferri signaculum, quod quum deleri non possit, 
iterari non debeat. 

Sed ut manifeste pateat Ordini hac in parte parem 
esse cum Baptismo conditioner)!, audiamus quid ait Gre- 
gorius: "Quod dicitis," inquit, "ut qui ordinatus est 
iterum ordinetur, valde ridiculum est." Ut enim bap- 
tizatus semel, iterum baptizari non debet, ita qui con- 
secratus est semel, in eodem Ordine non valet iterum 
consecrari. Videtis ut Ordinis sacramentum non magis 
iterari patiatur Ecclesia quam sacramentum Baptis- 
matis; quse res, ut dixi, pendet ab indeleto charactere. 
Qua de re, ut os obstruamus Luthero, ne rursus obgan- 
niat figmentum esse characterem, et solum ex antiquis 
Dionysium Ordinem vocasse sacramentum, subjun- 
gemus, ut polliciti sumus hac de re, etiam divi Augus- 
tini sententiam. Is igitur, quum de Baptismo et Ordine 
disserit, in hunc modum scribit : "Utrumque enim sacra 
mentum est, et quadam consecratione utrumque homini 
datur illud, quum baptizatur, et illud, quum ordinatur. 
Ideo non licet in Ecclesia catholica utrumque iterari. 
ISfam si quando ex hsereticorum parte venientes etiam 
prsepositi, pro bono pacis, correcto schismatis errore, 
suscepti sunt, et si visum est opus esse ut eadem officia 
gererent, quse gerebant, non sunt rursus ordinandi, sed 
sicut Baptismus in eis, ita mansit ordinatio integra, 
quia in prsecisione fuerat vitium, non in sacramentis, 
quse ubicumque sunt, ipsa sunt." Et paulo post : "Neutri 
sacramento facienda est injuria." Et addit de sacra- 
mento Ordinis: "Sicut non recte habet qui ab imitate 

420 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

And a little after, Injury must be done to neither of 
the two Sacraments. 7 

And of the Sacrament of Orders, he adds, That, as 
he that breaks off from Unity, has it not rightly, yet 
has it ; so likewise he does not rightly give it, yet gives 
it : And returning again to both, It hinders them not 
(says he) from being the Sacraments of Christ and his 
Church ; because Hereticks and wicked Persons use 
them unlawfully ; but these Men are to be corrected, and 
punished, and the Sacraments to be acknowledged and 
venerated/ You see how void of Truth it is, what 
Luther so boldly boasts, viz. That the Sacrament of Holy 
Orders was unknown to the Church of Christ: That 
Character is an idle Fiction; That the Invention of 
Sacraments is a new Thing: That Holy Orders were no 
Sacrament among the Antients. You see Nothing of 
what he has said, but has been rejected by the Testi 
mony of such Persons, as he cannot separate from the 
Church of Christ; for they were illustrious therein by 
Doctrine of Faith and exemplary Lives ; nor can he 
reckon them among the Moderns, if a thousand Years 
be not with him as one Day.* Notwithstanding this, 
he opposes himself against all the Eeasons, Authority, 
and Faith of all, by this one Argument: We are all 
Priests (says he) according to that of St. Peter. Ye are 
all a royal Priesthood, and priestly Kingdom;^ but as 
one cannot be more a Man than another; so one can be 
no more a Priest than another: Those,, therefore, who 
are called Priests, are no other but Lay-men, chosen by 
the only Consent of the People, or elected by the Bishop, 
not without the People: For to preach and ordain, are 
Nothing but mere Ministry, without any Thing of Sac 
rament. We have not only faithfully repeated his Argu 
ment, but also freely set down whatever may support 
him: And yet who would not laugh at this doltish 
*Ps. Ixxxix. 4. fl. Pet. ii. 9. 

De Sacramento Ordinis 421 

recedit, sed tamen habet, sic etiam non recte dat qui ab 
imitate recedit, et tamen dat." Et mrsus ad utrumque 
reversus adjecit: "Non ergo ideo non sunt sacramenta 
Christi et Ecclesise, quia eis illicite utuntur non modo 
hseretici, sed etiam omnes impii ; sed illi corrigendi sunt 
et puniendi, ilia autem sunt agnoscenda et vene- 

Videtis mine quam verum sit illud, quod Lutherus 
taiita jactavit audacia, sacramentum Ordinis Ecclesiam 
Christi nescire, characterem inane figmentum esse, sac- 
ramentorum inventionem novam esse, Ordinem veteri- 
bus non habitum pro sacramento. Quorum omnium 
nihil dixit, quod non videtis eorum testimonio reproba- 
tum, quos neque de Christi Ecclesia potest eximere 
(utpote quam illi et doctrina fidei, et exemplo virtutis 
illustrarunt), neque inter novos numerare, nisi talis sit, 
ut ei mille sint anni, tanquam dies unus. 

Sed ille tamen adversus omnes omnium rationes, 
auctoritatem, fidem, uno se tuetur argumento. "Ornnes," 
inquit, "sumus sacerdotes secundum illud Petri: Vos 
estis regale sacerdotium et sacerdotale regnum. Sed 
alius alio non potest magis esse sacerdos, quemadmodum 
alius alio non potest magis esse homo. Igitur sacerdotes 
qui vocantur, nihil sunt aliud, quam laici quidam, solo 
vel consensu populi, vel episcopi vocatione, non absque 
populo delecti ad concionandum, et Ordo nihil est aliud, 
quam merum sine sacramento ministerium." Recensui- 
mus ejus argumentum non solum fideliter, sed etiam 
liberaliter adjicientes quod fulciat: et tamen cui non 
excutiat risum tarn hebes theologantis argutia ? Nam si 

422 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

Divine? For, if the Order of Priesthood is therefore 
Nothing, because every Christian is a Priest; by the 
same Keason it will follow, that Christ had Nothing 
above Saul: For David said of Saul, Peccavi tangens 
Christum Domini; I have sinned in touching (Chris 
tum) the Anointed of our Lord: Or that Christ had 
Nothing above them, of whom it is said, Nolite tangere 
Christos meos; Touch not mine anointed: Finally, 
that God had Nothing above all those of whom he said 
by the Prophet, I have said ye are Gods, and are all the 
Sons of the most High. In a Word, all Christians are 
Kings in the same Manner that they are Priests : For it 
is not only said, Ye are a royal Priesthood; but also, a 
priestly Kingdom. Let us diligently observe what the 
Serpent designs, who, I suppose, is more crafty than to 
think this Argument of any Consequence, but only licks, 
that he may afterwards bite : He extols the Laity to the 
Priesthood, for this only Reason, that he may reduce 
Priests to the Rank of the Laity ; denying Priesthood to 
be a Sacrament, but only a Custom of electing a 
Preacher; and saying, That he who preaches, is no 
more a Priest, than the other; nay, no more a Priest, 
than a painted Man, is a Man : 7 Contrary to St. Paul, 
who, writing to Timothy, says, The Priests that rule 
well, are worthy of double Honour, especially such as 
labour in the Word and Doctrine* The Apostle, by 
this, evidently teaches, That though those are most 
worthy of double Honour, who, being Priests, do labour 
in the Word and Doctrine : Yet those who perform not 
This, but can only govern well, are also Priests; and 
merit double Honour. Otherwise, he would not have 
said, Especially those who labour in the Word and Doc 
trine; but only such as labour therein. 

Furthermore, that Luther may not be able to hold 
what he says, viz. That the Priest s Office is nothing 
*I. Tim. v. 17. 

De Sacramento Ordinis 423 

ideo nihil est Ordo sacerdotii, quia quilibet Christ! anus 
est sacerdos, eadem ratione sequetur ut nihil supra Saul 
habuerit Christus. Nam et de Saul dixit David : "Pec- 
cavi tangens CJiristum Domini/ Nihil habuerit Chris 
tus supra quemquam eorum, de quibus dictum est : "No- 
lite tangere Christos meos" Nihil denique supra quem 
quam Deus eorum omnium, de quibus per prophetam 
dixit ipse : "Ego dixi, Dii estis, et filii excelsi omnes." 
Postremo, qua ratione Christiani omnes sacerdotes sunt, 
eadem etiam ratione reges sunt. Non enim solum dici- 
tur: "Vos estis regale sacerdotium," sed etiam "sacer- 
dotale regnum." 

Sedulo considerandum est serpens iste quid destlnet, 
quern ego certe callidiorem puto, quam ut ullius esse 
momenti putet tarn frivol urn argumentum : sed qui tan- 
turn ideo lambit, ut mordeat, laicos ideo tollit in sacer- 
dotium, ut sacerdotes redigat in classem laicorum. Nam 
sacramentum esse negat, et ritum tantum esse dicit 
eligendi concionatoris. Nam qui non concionantur, 
nihil minus ait esse quam sacerdotes, nee aliter sacer 
dotes esse, quam homo pictus est homo; contra Paulum 
apostolum, qui ad Timotheum scribens ait: "Qui bene 
prcesunt presbyteri. duplici honore digni sunt, maxime 
qui laborant in verbo et doctrinal Apostolus hie mani- 
feste docet, quanquam ii prsecipue duplici honore digni 
sunt, qui quum presbyteri sint, laborant in verbo et doc- 
trina, tamen et qui hoc non faciunt, non solum esse 
presbyteros, sed et bene prseesse posse, et duplicem 
quoque honorem promereri. Alioqui non dixisset: 
maxime qui laborant in verbo et doctrina, sed solum ii 
qui laborant in verbo et doctrina. 

Prseterea ne possit dicere Lutherus id quod dicit, of- 
ficium sacerdotis erga populum nihil esse, nisi prsedi- 

424 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

but to preach to the People: For to say Mass (says he) 
is nothing but to receive the Communion for himself: 
I say, that it may appear how false this is ; let us again 
hear the Apostle s Words, Every Priest (says he) that 
is taken out from amongst Men, is constituted for Men, 
in the Things which belong to God, that he may offer 
Gifts and Sacrifices for their Sins. * Does not this 
plainly shew us that a Priest s Duty requires from him, 
to offer Sacrifices to God for Men ? Though writing to 
the Hebrews, (yet not willing, that Christians should 
be any Thing Jewish,) it is evident that it is spoken of 
the Priesthood of both Laws ; so that Luther is twice 
pressed by this Testimony : For he also teaches Mass to 
be a Sacrifice, and to be offered for the People : Seeing 
the Church offers no other ; and he teacheth, that the 
Duty of offering it, is the chief Part of the Priest s 
Charge. And truly if Luther s Words were not false, 
how easily may you see it to follow ; that since none but 
a Priest can consecrate our Lord s Body: of so many 
Thousand Priests, that have not the Gift of Preaching, 
if they were not truly Priests, but only equivocally so 
called, as a painted Man is called a Man ; then would 
almost all the Christian World have no other God, or 
People but Idolaters, adoring Bread for Christ, and 
bending their Knees to Baal. 

In the Right of electing, as he calls it, he attributes 
the chief Power to the People ; for though in one Place ; 
he seems to give this Rite promiscuously to the Bishop 
and People, (when he says, That although it is certain 
all Christians are equally Priests, and that they have a 
like Power in all the Sacraments: Yet that none can 
lawfully exercise this Power, without the Consent of the 
Congregation, or the Vocation of a Superior. Yet, in 
another Place, he gives the greatest Right to the People 
*Heb. v. 1. 

De Sacramento Ordinis 4-25 

care: nam "Missas," inquit, "canere nihil est aliud, 
quam communicare seipsum," hoc, inquam, ut appareat 
quam falsum sit, rursus audiamus Apostolum: ff Om- 
nis" inquit, "pontifex ex hominibus assumptus pro 
hominibus constituitur in his quce sunt ad Deum, ut 
offerat dona et sacrificia pro peccatis." Annon Apos- 
tolus aperte declarat etiam pontificis officmm istud pos- 
cere, ut pro hominibus offerat sacrificium Deo ? Quod 
quum scribat, quanquam Hebrseis, tamen Christianis, 
quos nolit judaizare, clarum est loqui de pontifice legis 
utri usque, atque ideo bis Lutherum suo premere testi- 
monio. Nsun et Missam docet esse sacrificium, et offerri 
pro populo, quum Ecclesia nullum offerat aliud, et docet 
offerendi officium prsecipuam partem esse muneris pon- 
tificii. Et certe, nisi falsum esset quod dicit Lutherus, 
facile videtis consequi ut quum nemo nisi sacerdos possit 
consecrare corpus Domini, si e tot sacerdotum millibus, 
qui concionari nesciunt, nullus vere sacerdos est, sed 
tantum vocatur sequivoce, quemadmodum homo pictus 
vocatur homo, totus Christianus orbis clerum popu- 
lumque ferme non habet alium quam idololatras, panem 
pro Christo colentes, et genua sua curvantes ante 

In eligendi, ut vocat, ritu, praecipuum jus tribuit 
populo. ]STam licet uno loco tribuere videatur episcopo 
aut populo jus promiscuum, quum dicit quod quanquam 
certum sit omnes Christianos sequaliter esse sacerdotes, 
et eamdem in verbo et sacramento quocumque habere 
potestatem, non licere tamen quemquam hac ipsa uti, 
nisi consensu communitatis aut vocatione majoris, alio 
tamen loco, superiores partes tribuit populo, quum de 
sacerdotibus dicit: "Qui si cogerentur admittere nos 
omnes sequaliter esse sacerdotes, quotquot baptizati 

426 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

when, speaking of Priests, he says, who, if they were 
compelled to admit all of us, who have been baptized 
equally to be Priests, as indeed we are; and that the 
Ministry is only given to them by our Consent; they 
should know also, that they have no Right of ruling over 
us, but what we admit them of our own free Will. 
Which two Places being compared together, shews his 
Opinion to be, That the People, without the Bishop, 
but not the Bishop without the People, can ordain 
Priests; as appears by his saying, That the Ministry 
only is permitted to the Priests, and that not without 
the Consent of the People : Which if true, a Priest 
cannot be ordained, without the People s Consent; by 
which alone, he says, That Bishops were formerly made 
Rulers of the Church. 

It cannot be denyed, (says he) that the true Churches 
were formerly governed by Elders, without the Ordi 
nations and Consecrations; being chosen to this, by 
Reason of their Age and long Experience in Things of 
that Kind. Pray let him shew us where he finds these 
Things ? For my Part, I do not think them to be true. 
For, if every Layman hath equal Power over any of the 
Sacraments, with a Priest ; and if the Order of Priest 
hood stands for Nothing, why writes the Apostle thus to 
Timothy, Neglect not the Grace which is in thee, and 
which has been given thee by Prophesy, by the Imposi 
tion of the Hands of the Presbytery ? * and in another 
Place, to the same, I admonish thee, that thou stir up 
the Grace of God that is in thee, by the Imposition of 
my Hands : f Again, Impose Hands suddenly on no 
Man, neither be thou Partakers of other Men s Sins. :}: 
Finally, these are the Words of the Apostle to Titus; 
For this Cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest 
correct the Things that are wanting; and constitute 
*I. Tim. iv. 14. fll. Tim. i. 6. {I. Tim. v. 22. 

De Sacramento Ordinis 427 

sumus, sicut re vera sumus, illisque solum ministerium, 
nostro tamen consensu, permissum, scirent simul nullum 
eis esse super nos jus imperil, nisi quantum nos sponte 
nostra admitterenms." 

Quse duo loca si confer antur, ostendunt hoc sentire 
Lutherum, ut populus absque episcopo possit ordinare 
sacerdotem, episcopus sine populi consensu non possit, 
quum dicit sacerdotibus solum ministerium, nee id 
tamen, nisi populi consensu, permissum. E"am si hoc 
verum est, sacerdos fieri nisi populi consensu non potest, 
cujus consensu solo dicit olim prsefectos Ecclesiis epis- 
copos. "Negari non potest/ inquit, "Ecclesias olim a 
senioribus fuisse rectas absque istis ordinationibus et 
consecrationibus, propter setatem et longum rerum usum 
in hoc electis." Lutherus ubi ista reperit, ostendat ipse ; 
mihi interim vera non videntur. Nam si laicus quisque 
sequalem habet potestatem cum sacerdote in quocumque 
sacramento, et Ordo sacerdotii nihil est ; cur ita scribit 
Apostolus Timotheo : "Noli negligere gratiam quce est 
in te, quce data est tibi per prophetiam, cum impositione 
manuum presbyterii?" Et alibi ad eumdem: ff Ad- 
moneo te ut ressuscites gratiam Dei, quce in te est per 
impositionem manuum mearum ?" Iterum : "Nemini" 
inquit, "cito manus imposueris, neque communices pec- 
catis alienis?" Denique hunc in modum Apostolus 
scribit ad Titum : "Hujus rei gratia retiqui te Cretce, ut 
ea quce desunt corrigas, et constituas per civitates pres- 
byteros, sicut et ego disposui tibi." 

428 Of the Sacrament of Orders 

Priests in the Cities, even as I have appointed 
tfaee. * 

Now Reader, you have, in a few Words, seen some 
Passages of the Apostle, by comparing of which, you 
may easily discover, that whatsoever Luther has thus 
disorderly vented against Order, are mere Fictions and 
Lyes: For what he says, is done by the People s Con 
sent, 7 St. Paul shews to be done by the Bishop, while he 
says, He has left him (Titus) at Crete, to that End that 
he should ordain Priests in the Cities, and that not 
rashly, but as he himself, when present, had appointed. 7 
You see, by this, that Priests are made by Imposition of 
Hands. And that it may not be doubted that Grace is 
also given at the same Time; you see, that it is con 
ferred by Imposition of Hands: Stir up (says he,) the 
Grace of God ; which has been given thee by the Imposi 
tion of my Hands : f And this also, Neglect not the 
Grace which is in thee, and which has been given thee 
through Prophesy, by Imposition of the Hands of the 
Presbytery $ Take Notice of these Things 1 ad 
mire that Luther is not ashamed to deny the Sacrament 
of Holy Orders, as he is not ignorant that the Words of 
St. Paul are in every Man s Hands ; which teach, that a 
Priest cannot be ordained but by a Bishop, and not 
without Consecration : In which both the corporeal Sign 
is adhibited, and so much spiritual Grace infused, that 
he who is consecrated, not only receives the Holy Ghost 
for himself, but also the Power of imparting it to others. 
Can that which the Apostle has writ be new, though it is 
so affirmed by Luther? How can it be unknown to the 
Church, which is, and has at all Times been, read 
through the universal Church of Christ? By these 
Things, it is manifest, that of all that Luther has railed 
out so confidently against Holy Orders, not one Syllable 
is true, but all the mere lying Inventions of his Malice. 
*Tit. i. 5. fll. Tim. i. 6. JI. Tim. iv. 14, 15. 

De Sacramento Ordinis 

Habes mine, lector, semel sub oculis Apostoli pauca 
loca, et non multa verba, quibus inter se collatis facile 
potes deprehendere falsa fictaque esse omnia quibus tarn 
inordinate Lutherus debacchatur in Ordinem. Xam 
quos dicit populi consensu fieri, Paulus ostendit fieri ab 
episcopo, quern in hoc ait se reliquisse Greta?, ut oppi- 
datim presbyteros constitueret, nee tamen temere, sed 
sicut ipse prcesens disposuerat. Vides impositis mani- 
bus fieri sacerdotem. Et ne dubitari possit simul con- 
ferri gratiam, vides illam manuum impositione colla- 
tam. "Ressuscita" inquit, "gratiam quo? data est tibi 
per impositionem manuum mearum." Et illud quoque : 
"Noli negligere gratiam quce in te est, quce data est tibi 
per prophetiam, cum impositione manuum presbyterii; 
in Us te exerce" Miror igitur non pudere Lutherum, 
qimm negat sacramentum Ordinis: baud ignarus in 
manibus omnium versari verba Pauli, quse doceant non 
nisi a sacerdote fieri sacerdotem, nee sine consecratione 
fieri, in qua et signum adhibeatur corporeum, et tantum 
spiritalis infuiidatur gratise, ut is, qui consecratur, non 
solum accipiat ipse Spiritum sanctum, sed etiam potes- 
tatem conferendi aliis. Novum vero qui potest esse, 
quanquam id Lutherus ait, de quo scribit Apostolus ? 
Quomodo ignoratum Ecclesise, quod in omnibus Christi 
legitur, et nunquam non legebatur Ecclesiis? Quibus 
ex rebus manifestum est e tarn multis quse tanta cum 
confidentia pro compertissimis Lutherus deblateravit in 
Ordinem ne imam quidem syllabam fuisse veram, sed 
per malitiam ficta falsaque omnia. 


f tbe Sacrament of Eytreme function 

Tiff this Sacrament of Extreme Unction ; that Luther 
might be twice derided himself, he twice scoffs the 
Church: First, because Divines,, (says he) do call this 
Unction a Sacrament; (as if those he calls Divines, 
were the only Men who call it a Sacrament.) Again, 
because they call it Extreme ; to which, as to the second, 
he himself objects, after a joking Manner, what he can 
never answer in earnest : For it may be rightly called 
Extreme, as being the last of four. Afterwards, to shew 
that it is no Sacrament, himself first objects, what he 
foresees every Body will object against him, viz. the 
Words of St. James the Apostle, If any be sick amongst 
you, let him send for the Priests of the Church, and let 
them pray over him, anointing him with Oil, in the 
Name of our Lord: And the Prayers of the Faithful 
will save the Sick, and our Lord will raise him up ; and 
if he be in Sins, they shall be forgiven him. * These 
Words, (which, according to his own Definition, most 
apparently testify Extreme Unction to be a Sacrament, 
as wanting neither a visible Sign, nor Promise of 
Grace) he immediately begins, with most impudent Con 
fidence, to deride; as if they were of no Manner of 
Force. For my Part, (says he) I say, that if ever 
there was Folly acted, it is especially in this Place. 
And I, again on the Contrary do affirm, that if ever 
Luther was mad at any Time, (as indeed his Madness 
appears almost in every Place,) he is certainly dis- 
*Jas. v. 14, 15. 


2>e Sacr; Cytrema^Iinctionte 

IN sacramento Extremse-Unctionis, Lutherus bis ipse 
ridendus, bis irridet Ecclesiam. Primum, quod Theo- 
logi, ut ait, hanc unctionem appellant sacramentum 
(quasi soli hoc dicant hi, quos ille vocat theologos), 
deinde, quod appellent extremam. Et quod ad secun- 
dum pertinet, objicit sibi tanquam joco quod nunquam 
solvet serio. 

E"am et ideo quoque vere dici potest extrema, quod 
extrema sit e quatuor. Postea, ut doceat non esse sacra 
mentum, objicit sibi primum id quod neminem videt 
non objecturum, apostoli Jacobi verba: ff Si infirmatur 
quis in vobis, inducat presbyteros Ecclesice, et orent 
super eum, ungentes oleo in nomine Domini: et oratio 
fidei salvabit infirmum, et alleviabit eum Dominus, et 
si in peccatis sit remittentur ei." Hsec verba, quse ex 
ipsius etiam finitione apertissime declarant hanc unc 
tionem sacramentum esse, quse neque signo careat visi- 
bili, nee promissione gratise, protinus incipit Phormiana, 
conndentia, tanquam nihil haberent vigoris, eludere. 
a Ego autem dico," inquit, a si uspiam deliratum est, 
hoc loco prsecipue deliratum est." At ego contra non 
verebor dicere quod si uspiam delirat Lutherus (qui 
fere delirat ubique) hie in sacramento Unctionis- 
Extremse ad extremam usque delirat amentiam. 
"Omitto," inquit, a quod hanc epistolam non esse apos 
toli Jacobi, nee apostolico spiritu dignam, multi valde 
probabiliter asserant, licet consuetudine auctoritatem, 
cujuscumque sit, obtinuerit. Tamen," inquit, "si esset 

432 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

tracted here, in the Sacrament of Extreme Unction, to 
an extreme Height of Madness. I omit (says he) say 
ing that many do probably assert this not to be the 
Epistle of the Apostle St. James, nor worthy an apos 
tolic Spirit, though by Custom, whosoever it be, it has 
obtained Authority: Yet if it were certainly written 
by the Apostle St. James, I should say that it is not 
lawful for an Apostle to institute a Sacrament by his 
own Authority; that is, to give a divine Promise, with 
a Sign joined thereunto: This belongs to Christ alone. 
So that St. Paul says that he received from our Lord the 
Sacrament of the Eucharist ; and that he was sent, not 
to baptize, but to preach the Gospel : But of the Sacra 
ment of Extreme Unction we read no where in the 
Gospel. 7 You see how he endeavours here, two Ways, 
to weaken the Words of the Apostle. First, he will not 
have the Epistle to have been writ by the Apostle. Sec 
ondly, though it was by him written; yet will he not 
have the Apostle to have Authority of instituting Sacra 
ments. Although he has proposed these two Things in a 
few Words, and passes hastily on to some other ; yet are 
they the chief Weapons, by which he intends to destroy 
this Sacrament; for what else he says, are but Trifles, 
whereby he takes Occasion to laugh, as if the Church 
did not well in observing this Sacrament. But these 
two do come both to the same Thing : For if the Epistle 
had not been writ by the Apostle, or is not worthy an 
apostolical Spirit; or if, for the Apostle s giving this 
Unction for a Sacrament, it be not the more approved 
to be one: Yet it should follow plainly, that nothing 
could be effected by these Words. If he had said, that 
it was formerly doubted whose Epistle this was, he had 
said truly; for the Church admits Nothing rashly, it 
discusses every Thing diligently : And this it doth, that 
every Thing it receives, may be had for greater Cer- 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 433 

apostoli Jacobi, dicerem non licere apostolum sua auc- 
toritate sacramentum instituere, id est divinam promis- 
sionem cum adjuncto signo dare; hoc ad Christum 
solum pertinebat. Sic Paulus sese accepisse a Domino 
dicit sacramentum Eucharistise, et missum, non ut bap- 
tizet, sed ut evangelizet. Nusquam autem legitur in 
evangelio Unctionis istius extremse sacramentum." 

His verbis videtis ut apostoli verba duobus modis 
enervare conatur, primum, quod epistola non sit apos 
toli, deinde quod, etiamsi sit apostoli, tamen apostolus 
auctoritatem non habeat instituendi sacramenta. Hsec 
duo quanquam proponat paucis, ac statim ad alia transi- 
liat, tarnen prsecipua tela sunt, quibus instituit hoc 
sacramentum perimere. Nam csetera quse dicit omnia, 
nugamenta sunt, ridendi occasionem captantia, tanquam 
Ecclesia non recte sacramentum observet. Sed hsec duo 
vivum tangunt. Nam si epistola non apostoli sit, nee 
apostolico spiritu digna, aut si apostolo tradente Unc- 
tionem hanc pro sacramento, tamen nihilomagis probe- 
tur sacramentum, consequeretur omnino ut hsec verba 
nihil efficerent. 

Si dixisset olim fuisse dubitatum cujus ilia fuerit 
epistola, dixisset vere: neque enim temere quicquam 
recepit Ecclesia ; omnia diligenter excussit, idque ipsum 
facit, ut certiora deberent haberi omnia, quse receperit, 
etiamsi duntaxat humana prudentia regeretur Ecclesia, 

434 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

tainty ; though it were only directed by human Policy. 
But when he says, That many do assert this Epistle, not 
only, not to be of the Apostle s Writing; but also, un 
worthy of an apostolical Spirit ; and that they not only 
assert, but probably assert this; it is more than prob 
able, he cannot prove what he says; otherwise let him 
name some of these many Persons; who if they be of 
the Church, I suppose they are not so many, nor of so 
great Authority, as to be able to stand out against the 
whole Church. But as yet he has produced none: I 
will therefore bring one who may suffice against his 
many, to wit, St. Hierom; who, in holy Scriptures, was 
the most learned of his Time, and has as exactly distin 
guished between dubious and real Things, as could be 
possible. This great Man, after he had for some Time 
remained doubtful, of the Epistle of St. Paul, (and that 
only at such Time as it was not confirmed by a full Con 
sent of the whole Church.) Yet he pronounces the 
Epistle of St. James to be undoubtedly of his own 
Writing: His Words are these, St. James, St. Peter, 
St. Jude, and St. John, have published seven Epistles, 
as mystical, as they are succinct and short ; yea, likewise 
long; short in Words, and long in Sentences, so that 
there are not many, who would not be blinded in the 
reading them. The same St. Hierom, speaks thus of 
the seven canonical Epistles, The first of them is one 
>f St. James s, the second, of St. Peter s, three of St. 
John s, one of St. Jude s : You see how this Father 
has the same Opinion of St. James s Epistle that he has 
of St. Peter s ; nor does he think it unworthy an apos 
tolical Spirit: Truly if Luther had brought us any 
Reasons why this Epistle must not be accounted St. 
James s, (though of some other Person, who should 
speak in the same Spirit,) yet should he be in some Sort 
tolerable. But now he says, It is not probable it should 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 435 

Verum quum dicat multos asserere hanc epistolam non 
solum non esse apostoli, sed esse prseterea indignam 
apostolico spiritu, atque istud non asserere solum, sed 
asserere etiam probabiliter, probabile est ilium istud 
probare non posse. Alioqui proferat e multis aliquos 
qui, si ex Ecclesia sunt, neque tarn multi sunt, opinor, 
neque tarn magni, ut pondus obtinere mereantur ad- 
versus reliquos omnes. Adhuc produxit nullum. Ego 
producam unum, qui sufficere debet adversus multos, 
beatum Hieronymum, quo neque doctior quisquam fuit 
in Scripturis sacris, neque qui veras ac germanas ex- 
actiore censura distinxit a dubiis. 

Is igitur quum aliquandiu de epistola Pauli dubi- 
tasset, sed tune dubitasset, quum res adhuc non esset tain 
pleno Ecclesise consensu firmata, Jacobi tamen, quse 
vocatur epistola, ipsius esse sine ulla dubitatione pro- 
nuntiat. Nam hunc in modum scribit: " Jacobus, 
Petrus, Judas et Joannes, septem epistolas ediderunt, 
tarn mysticas quam succinctas, et breves pariter et 
longas, breves in verbis, longas in sententiis, ut rarus sit 
qui non in earum c^ecutiat lectione." Idem in prologo 
in septem epistolas canonicas sic ait: "Est enim prima 
earum una Jacobi, duse Petri, tres Joannis, una 

Videtis ut beatus Hieronymus idem judicium de 
Jacobi profert epistola, quod de Petri, nee putat in 
dignam apostolico spiritu. Certe si rationes attulisset 
Lutherus, quare epistola non esset Jacobi, sed tamen 
alterius cujuspiam, qui eodeni loqueretur spiritu, potuis- 
set utcumque ferri. Nunc vero dicit esse probabile ideo 
non esse, quod sit indigna spiritu apostolico. Qua in re 
non alium objiciam Luthero, quam Lutherum ipsum, 

436 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

be St. James s, because it is unworthy an apostolical 
Spirit: In which Thing, I will bring no Objections, 
but Luther s own against Luther; for none did ever 
more frequently and strongly contradict himself, than 
Luther. In the Sacrament of holy Order, he says, The 
Church has Power given her to discern the Word of 
God, from the Words of Men. How then does he say, 
that this Epistle is unworthy an apostolical Spirit, 
which the Church whose Judgment (as himself con 
fesses) cannot err in this, has judged it to be full of 
apostolical Spirit ? Wherefore, he has now, by his own 
Wisdom, so hemmed himself in on all Sides, that he 
must necessarily consent that this Epistle belongs to the 
Apostle, contrary to what he has affirmed to be probable ; 
or, that the Church can err in distinguishing Scripture, 
which before he denyed. If he says that the Church has 
approved, as worthy of an apostolical Spirit, what is 
unworthy, then is he a Blasphemer against the Church : 
If he hold that the Apostle has writ what is unworthy 
an Apostle, then is he a Blasphemer against the Apostle. 
We have therefore sufficiently confuted this: Indeed 
he has sufficiently confuted himself, in denying the 
Epistle to belong to the Apostle, or to be worthy an 
apostolical Spirit. Now come we to that, in which, like 
a valiant Man, he openly sets upon the Apostle himself, 
saying, That though it was of the Apostle s Writing, 
yet it is not lawful for an Apostle to institute a Sacra 
ment by his own Authority ; that is, To give a divine 
Promise, with a Sign thereunto adjoined : Eor this (says 
he) belongs to Christ alone. O this happy Age! in 
which Luther, this new Doctor of the Gentiles, is risen, 
who will seem himself to follow the Example of St. 
Paul, by resisting an Apostle to his Face,* as not going 
the right Way to the Gospel of Christ, but (which is 
*Gal. ii. 11-14. 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 437 

neque enim Luthero quisquam aut ssepius ferme contra- 
dicit, aut validius, quam Lutherus. Is igitur in sacra- 
mento Ordinis ait Ecclesiam hoc habere datum, ut possit 
discernere verba Dei a verbis hominum. Quomodo ergo 
nunc dicit epistola apostolico spiritu indignam esse, 
quam Ecclesia, cujus judicium, ut ait, hac in re falli 
non potest, apostolico spiritu judicavit plenam? Qua- 
mobrem nunc ita se sua sapientia constrinxit undique, 
ut aut necessario comprobet epistolam esse apostoli 
(cujus contrarium dixit esse probabile) aut dicat Eccle 
siam in Scriptura sacra posse dijudicanda falli, quod 
earn posse negaverat. Quod si dicat velut apostolico 
dignum spiritu comprobasse, quod apostolico spiritu sit 
indignum, blasphemus est in Ecclesiam. Si fatetur 
apostolum scripsisse quod apostolo sit indignum, blas 
phemus est in apostolum. 

Satis igitur illud confutavimus, imo semet satis con- 
futavit ipse, quod epistolam negavit aut esse apostoli, 
aut dignam apostolico spiritu. Veniamus nunc ad id in 
quo, ut fortem virum decet, aperte oppugnat apostolum, 
dicens, etiamsi sit apostoli Jacobi, tamen non licere 
apostolo sua auctoritate sacramentum instituere, id est, 
divinam promissionem cum adjuncto signo dare. "Hoc 
enim pertinet," inquit, a ad solum Christum." O nostri 
sseculi magnam felicitatem, quo novus iste Gentium 
doctor exortus est Lutherus, qui hoc sibi arrogans, tan- 
quam Pauli sequeretur exemplum, in faciem resistat 
apostolo, quod non recta via ingrediatur ad evangelium 
Christi, sed, quod plus est, quam si gentes doceat 
judaizare, arroget sibi facultatem promittendi gratiam, 
et sacramenta condendi, hoc est, quod usurpet sibi potes- 

438 Of the Sacrament of Extreme V notion 

more than if he should teach the Gentiles to Judaize) 
arrogating to himself the Power of promising Grace, 
and instituting Sacraments ; usurping in that the Power 
of Christ ; like the proud and traitorous Angel, who said, 
<I will establish my Throne in the North, and be like 
to the most High/* The Pope has no great Cause of 
being vexed at his Reproaches, who charges such enor 
mous Crimes upon the Apostle himself : For, since it is 
certain this Epistle belongs to the Apostle; what else 
does he then, but manifestly accuse the Apostle of hav 
ing (without Authority, and against all Right) insti 
tuted this Sacrament ? Nay, when he denies the Epistle 
to belong to the Apostle (lest he should leave off his 
Calumny,) he professes, that he would say as much, if 
It were of the Apostle s own Writing! Indeed, though 
some think, that the Apostle received Power of insti 
tuting Sacraments, (not without the Power of the Holy 
Ghost, which God sent them at Pentecost, and of which 
Christ had foretold, The Holy Ghost which I will send 
unto you, He shall teach you all Things. )f Yet shall 
not I dispute it at this Time, whether an Apostle has 
such Power or no, because it is now not necessary to 
dispute it. But seeing it is evident, that the Apostle 
gives us this Unction as a Sacrament, I do not doubt, 
but it is really a Sacrament; and that the Apostle was 
not so impiously arrogant, as to give the People, for a 
Sacrament, what was in Reality no such Thing. But if 
the Apostle had not the Power of instituting this Sacra 
ment himself, then has he delivered it to the People in 
these Words, as he received it from Christ, who, as he 
would notify to the World some Things by St. Matthew, 
some by St. Luke, some by St. John, and some by the 
Apostle St. Paul; why is it not possible he should be 
*Isai. xiv. 13, 14. fjohn xiv. 26. 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 439 

tatem Christi, ad modum superbientis et prsevaricantis 
angeli, qui dixit: "Ponam solium meum ad aquilonem, 
et ero similis Altissimo!" Non est nunc quod segre 
ferat Pontifex ab illo reprehend!, qui de tarn atroce 
crimine reprehendit apostolum. Nam quum certum sit 
epistolam esse apostoli, quid aliud quam manifeste dicit 
apostolum sine auctoritate et contra fas instituere sacra- 
mentum ? Inio quum neget epistolam illius esse, tamen 
ne abstineret contumelia, dicit id se dicturum etiamsi 
esset apostoli. Ego certe etsi nonnullis visum sit apos- 
tolis non sine Spiritu sancto, quern Deus in Pentecoste 
misit, rationem traditam esse condendi sacramenti, de 
quo spiritu Christus praedixerat: "Spimtus sanctus 
quern ego mittam, ille vos docebit omnia" tamen in prse- 
sente non disputabo, utrum apostolus auctoritatem 
habeat instituendi sacramenti, quippe quod nunc dis- 
putari non opus est : sed quum plane constet apostolum 
TJnctionem istam pro sacramento tradere, non dubito 
vere sacramentum esse, et apostolum non fuisse tarn 
impie arrogantem, ut pro sacramento traderet populo 
quod sacramentum non esset ; sed, si condendi sacra 
menti potestatem non habuit, verbis illis id tradidisset 
populo, quod ipse acceperat a Christo, qui, ut alia 
mundo volebat innotescere per Matthseum, alia per Lu- 
cam, per Joannem alia, alia prseterea per apostolum 
Paulum, cur fieri non possit, ut qusedam etiam doceri 
voluerit per apostolum Jacobum ? 

440 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

pleased to make known some Things unto us, by the 
Apostle St. James. 

Luther having thus strenuously behaved himself 
against the Apostle, begins now altogether to turn him 
self against the Church: Which (as he says) abuseth 
the Words of the Apostle, in not administring this Unc 
tion to the Sick, but when at the Point of Death: 7 
Whereas St. James says, If any be sick, not if any be 
dying. As if the Church sinned in not exhibiting in 
considerately, in every light Fever, (contracted, per 
haps, by too much Drinking) so great a Thing as a 
Sacrament; or, in not attributing to herself a Miracle 
in healing such Disease, as either Sleep, or Abstinence 
can cure ; that it may not be doubted, though the Apostle 
writes sick, that yet he did not mean a Man in every 
light Sickness, but troubled with such Sickness, as, if 
cured, may shew to be taken away by Virtue of the 
Sacrament; and that this Sacrament is not to be ad 
hibited, but in great Sickness; appears by all the 
Prayers which are said over the sick Person, which, no 
Doubt, are very antient, and not of the new Invention 
of those he calls Divines. And though they do not 
promise an assured Health of the Body, yet do they not 
despair of Health; nor do they (as Luther says,) come 
to such only, as are sure undoubtedly to die; for it 
should be in vain to pray for his Health, if they were 
sure of his Death. 

Therefore the Church s Intention, is, not (as he im 
pertinently cavils) that this should be the last Sacra 
ment, although it is so called, but on the Contrary, and 
that the sick Person may recover his Health ; which, if 
God is not pleased he should ; yet that is no Prejudice to 
the Force and Virtue of the Sacrament, which tends 
more to the curing of the Soul, than to the Health of 
the Body. 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctwnis 441 

Lutherus postquam se tarn strenue quam videtis gessit 
ad versus apostolum, jam totum se convertit ad ridendum 
Ecclesiam, quse verbis apostoli, ut dicit Lutherus, abuti- 
tur, quod non ministret, nisi ad mortem usque segrotanti, 
quum Jacobus dicat: fe Si quis infirmatur.," non si quis 
moriatur : quasi ideo peccet Ecclesia, quod rem tantam, 
quanta est sacr amentum, non adhibeat temere in quali- 
bet levi febricula, quam aliquis nimium fortasse potando 
contraxerit, neque in eo morbo, qui vel dormiendo 
paululum, vel abstinendo curari possit, Ecclesia per sac- 
ramentum velit efflagitare miraculum! E"e dubitari 
possit, etiamsi duntaxat infirmum scripserit Jacobus, 
sensisse tamen baud aegrotantem leviter, sed eo morbo 
vexatum, cujus depulsio posset ostendere, si sanaretur, 
sanatum sacramento, orationes omnes quse dicuntur 
super infirmum (quas nemo dubitat esse vetustissimas, 
non novum inventum eorum, quos iste vocat theologos), 
ostendunt non adhibendum hoc sacramentum, nisi in 
laborante graviter: et tamen ut non promittunt certam 
salutem corporis, ita non desperant salutem, nee 
veniunt, quod Lutherus ait, tanquam ad eos, qui jam 
turn sint omnino morituri. Frustra enim tot orationi- 
bus orarent salutem, si certo sibi sponderent mortem. 
!N~on igitur id agit Ecclesia, quod inepte cavillatur iste, 
ut sit Extrema-Unctio, licet vocetur extrema, sed agit ut 
non sit extrema, sed convalescat segrotus. Quod si nolit 
eum Deus convalescere, id tamen non evacuat vim ac 
virtutem sacramenti, cujus praecipua cura non in corpus 
fertur, sed animam. 

442 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

As for Luther s Reason, concerning the Efficacy of 
the Sign, it is altogether without Reason or Efficacy: 
If that Unction be (says he) a Sacrament, it ought, 
without Doubt, to be an effectual Sign of what it prom 
ises; but it promises the Health and Recovery of the 
Sick, as appears by the Words, The Prayers of the 
Faithful shall save the Sick, and our Lord will raise 
him up : Yet who sees not but this Promise is fulfilled 
in very few? What shall we say then? (says he), For 
either the Apostle speaks false in this Promise, or else 
this Unction is no Sacrament ; for a sacramental Prom 
ise is certain, but this, for the most Part, fails. 5 It ap 
pears by this only Argument, that Luther cares not 
much how open his Calumnies are, so that he can but, 
under some Pretext of Truth, impose upon the Unwary : 
For he shames not to object against the Divines, (as 
said by them,) what they never spoke: A Sacrament 
(says he) is, according to their Sayings, an effectual 
Sign of what it promiseth ; but this Sacrament gives not 
the Health of the Body, which it promiseth/ But 
Divines say no such Thing; they say it is an effectual 
Sign of Grace, defining it thus, A Sacrament is a visible 
Sign of invisible Grace: 7 They do not speak of the 
Health of the Body, which may be given without Grace. 
So that when he says, That if Unction be a Sacrament, 
Lhe Apostle should lye ; it is Luther himself that lyeth : 
For the Sacrament, in as much as it is a Sacrament 
promiseth not the Health of the Body, but of the Soul, 
by a corporeal Sign. Nevertheless, Luther comprehends, 
under the same Lye, not only the Apostle, but Christ 
himself, though Unction were no Sacrament: For the 
Words and Promise ought to be true also, without the 
Sacrament. Therefore, when the Apostle says, The 
Sick shall be healed by Unction and Prayers; 7 And 
when Christ says, These Signs shall follow those that 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 443 

Nam ratio ilia Lutheri de efficacia signi nihil omnino 
rationis habet, aut efficacise. "Si unctio ista sacranien- 
tum est," inquit, a debet sine dubio esse, ut dicunt, 
efficax signum ejus quod signat et promittit. At sani- 
tatem et restitutionem infirmi promittit, ut stant aperta 
verba : Oratio fidei salvabit infirmum, et alleviabii eum 
Dominus. Quis autem non videt hanc promissionem 
in paucis impleri ? Quid ergo dicemus, inquit ? Aut 
apostolus hac prornissione mentitur, aut unctio ista sac- 
ramentum non erit ; promissio enim sacramentalis certa 
est, at hsec majore parte fallit." 

Vel ex hoc argumento patere potest nihil curare Lu- 
therum quam apertas afferat calumnias, modo specie 
aliqua veritatis imponere possit incautis, quern non 
pudet ea contra theologos afferre, quasi ab ipsis dicta, 
quae nusquam dicunt. "Sacramentum," inquit, "ut 
dicunt, est efficax signum ejus quod promittit: at hoc 
sacramentum sanitatem corporis non efficit, quam 
promittit." Theologi non istud dicunt, sed quod est 
efficax signum gratia?. Sic enim definiunt: sacramen 
tum est visibile signum invisibilis gratis; non dicunt 
salutis corporese, quse dari possit et sine gratia. Qua- 
mobrem, quod ait consequi, ut, si haec unctio sacramen 
tum esset, apostolus mentiretur, Lutherus ipse menti 
tur. Nam sacramentum, quatenus sacramentum est, 
non salutem promittit corporis, sed animse, per signa 
corporea. Alioqui Lutherus nihilominus eodem con- 
cludit mendacio, non apostolum solum, sed etiam Chris 
tum ipsum, quanquam unctio non esset sacramentum. 
Debent enim verba et promissiones etiam extra sacra- 
menta veraces esse. Igitur quum apostolus dicat sanan- 
dum per unctionem et orationem, eum qui infirmus est, 
et Christus, signa ilia secutura credentes, ut super segros 
manus imponerent, et bene haberent, quis non videt hsec 
sic interdum fieri, ut tamen non fiant semper ? Neque 

444 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

believe in him, to wit, that thej should lay Hands on 
the Sick, and they should be healed ; * who sees not that 
sometimes these Things are performed, but not always ? 
Neither yet are they false who promised them: For, in 
whatsoever Words they promised corporeal Things ; yet 
every Body knows, they never promised them to be per 
petual, when the Body, in which they are to be done, 
cannot last always. But spiritual Things are here to be 
understood, because the Spirit is to live for ever. For 
Luther s Sentence (which exacts from the Divines, that, 
if Unction is a Sacrament, it may always cure, that may 
not be an ineffectual Sign) undertakes to prove that it 
cannot be a Sacrament, if it renders not the Body im 
mortal : Which, nevertheless, he himself promises to be 
done by the Prayers of good Men, without the least stag 
gering in Faith: For, (says he) There is no Doubt, but 
at this Day, as many as we please may be cured: 7 
Which, if true, such a Faith as this may preserve Man 
jramortal: For, seeing this may be done by Faith, not 
only Sometimes, but, as he affirms, always, if Faith be 
stable and undoubtful ; it is probable indeed, if any one 
ever meet with such a Faith : And doubtless Luther was 
a Man of such Faith, (having so much thereof, that in 
Favour of it, in many Places, he almost bids Defiance to 
good Works; being likewise one to whom God has re 
vealed so many, and so great Mysteries, and who erects 
a new Church, for which Miracles are absolutely neces 
sary) it is therefore likely that Luther can perform 
abundantly whatever can be done by Faith. If this be 
true, I wonder he cures not every dying Person! We 
look for News daily from Germany of his raising the 
Dead : Yet, for all this, we hear that not only none are 
cured by him, but that many good and innocent Priests 
are killed, (by his Adherents) and cruelly murthered 
*Mk. xvi. 17, 18. 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 445 

tamen falsos esse qui promiserint, quum eos nemo dubi- 
tet corporalia, quibuscumque verbis promiserint, nun- 
quam promisisse perpetua, quum corpus in quo fieri 
deberent perpetuum esse non possit. Spiritalia vero, 
quia sua natura spiritus seternum victurus est, perpetua 
consecutura pollicentur. 

Nam Lutheri sententia, quse a theologis exigit ut, si 
sacramentum sit Unctio, semper sanet, ne sit signum 
inefficax, eo tendit ut sacramentum esse non possit, nisi 
reddat corpus immortale, quod ipse tamen fieri posse 
promittit per orationem f actam a bonis viris nihil hsesi- 
tante fide. E"am prorsus dubium non esse dicit, hodie 
quoque, sic sanari posse quotquot vellemus. Hoc si 
dicit verum, talis fides qualis est illius, hominem servare 
potest immortalem. ISTam quum ista fieri possint per 
fidem, non solum interdum, sed, quod Lutnerus ait, 
perpetuo, modo sit fides indubia, quse nihil hsesitet, 
credibile est fidem istam, si cuiquam alteri, potissimum 
contigisse Luthero, homini sic in fidem propenso, ut, 
fidei favore, bonis operibus multis in locis propemodum 
indicat bellum. Homini praeterea, cui nunc tot et tanta 
mysteria revelavit Deus, ct qui novam condit Ecclesiam, 
quam in rem opus est et miraculis. Igitur verisimile 
est, quicquid fieri per fidem potest, abunde Lutherum 
facere. Demiror igitur, si vera dicit, ipsum non curare 
quoscumque morientes. Et quotidie auscultamus 
rumores e Germania, qui referant ressuscitatos etiam 
sepultos, quum interim semper audimus non modo sana- 
tum nullum, sed etiam per illius quosdam satellites, 
occisos et crudeliter trucidatos, ejus causa, bonos et 
innocentes sacerdotes, ut exemplo doceret Ordinem 
nihil esse, figmentum esse characterem, meticulosum 

446 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

for his Sake ; that, by his Example, he may teach, That 
Holy Order is nothing: That Character is a Fiction: 
That David was timorous for repenting himself to have 
touched the Lord s Anointed. * 

These are Luther s Cures, wrought by his great Faith, 
without good Works. For, seeing he kills, and cures 
not; it appears plainly, (as he says, That Prayers are 
to be made not only by Faith, but also by good Men/) 
that Luther, not being a good Man, can therefore cure 
no Body himself. This Unction, he says, is no Sacra 
ment, because it does not always heal the Body : But 
himself is a holy Man, by whom, as it is reported, the 
Body is killed, and certainly Souls are killed. St. James 
writes nothing worthy an apostolick Spirit ; but Luther 
writes every Thing worthy such Spirit, and discerns 
Things unworthy thereof, and that against the whole 
Church : which, as he acknowledges, cannot be deceived 
in discerning such Scripture. In which Thing, when I 
had read St. James s Epistle, and saw so many Things 
worthy an apostolic Spirit therein, (as the Joy in over 
coming Temptations, Patience in Adversity, Wisdom to 
be begged from God, Hopes to be placed in God without 
staggering, with many such like ; all which are read in 
the Apostle) I much wonder what Reason Luther had 
to think them unworthy to have been writ by an Apostle. 
But perhaps Luther would that the Apostle had writ 
such Things as these, to wit, That Mass is not profitable 
to the People, that Order is a vain Fiction; and such 
like, as himself writes ; which are all Things worthy an 
apostolic Spirit. 

But though, as I said, I admired why Luther should 
be so much displeased at St. James s Epistle; yet, hav- 
*I. Ks. xxvi. 11, 23. 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 447 

fuisse Davidem, quern poenituerit tetigisse Christum 

Hsec sunt Lutheri sanationes, quas nihil vacillans 
ejus fides operatur, absque bonis operibus. Nam quod 
occidit, non sanat, inde plane accedit, quod, ut Lutherus 
ait, oratio non tantum cum fide facienda est, sed etiam 
a bono viro, quse res Lutherum, qui vir bonus non est, 
ne quemquam sanet, impedit. Unctio hsec sacramen- 
tum non est, quia non semper sanat corpus. Lutherus 
vir sacer est, per quern et corpus, ut ferunt, occiditur, 
et certe occiduntur animse. Jacobus apostolus nihil 
dignum scribit apostolico spiritu; Lutherus apostolico 
spiritu digna scribit omnia, et quse sint indigna dis- 
cernit, idque contra totam Ecclesiam, quam in talium 
discretione Scripturarum falli, fassus est ipse non 

Qua in re, quum epistolam Jacobi legerem, atque ibi 
tarn multa conspicerem apostolico digna spiritu, vehe- 
menter admiratus sum quid in mentem venerit Luthero, 
ut gaudium in tentationibus, patientiam in adversis, a 
Deo petendam sapientiam, in Deo fiducia nihil haesi- 
tante, sperandum, et hujusmodi multa (nam talia sunt, 
quse tota leguntur epistola) miratus, inquam, sum, cur 
Lutherus putarit indigna quse scriberentur ab apostolo: 
an ilia potius scribere debebat apostolus, populo nihil 
esse fructus in Missa, et Ordinem inane figmentum 
esse, et alia quse Lutherus scribit hujusmodi ? quse quan- 
quam sint omnia dignissima spiritu apostatico, tamen 
contemnere non debet, si minor a scribant minores 

Atqui licet aliquandiu, quod dixi, iniratus sum cur 
Luthero displiceat epistola Jacobi, tamen ubi legi 
ssepius, et oculos intendi pressius, desii profecto mirari. 

448 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

ing read it more attentively, I wonder not at all: For, 
by the Apostle s Writings, I find that he so narrowly 
touches Luther every-where, as if, by his prophetic 
Spirit, he had plainly foreseen him. For, when Luther 
under the Pretext of Faith, despises good Works; St. 
James, on the other Side, disputes, by Keason, Scrip 
ture, and Example, that Faith without Works, is 
dead : Nor is it in one Place alone, that by bitter 
Words, he resists that prattling Petulancy of Luther: If 
any one (says he) esteem himself religious, not bridling 
his Tongue, but seducing his own Heart, his Religion 
is vain. * Besides Luther frets at this, which he sees 
very fitly may be applied to his own Tongue. The 
Tongue is a restless Evil, full of deadly Poison, f Finally, 
he perceives that what the Apostle has writ against con 
tentious Persons, is truly spoken against his own Opin 
ions: For (says the Apostle) who is wise and well- 
disciplined among you ? Let him shew forth his Works 
by a good Conversation, in the Meekness of Wisdom; 
because, if you have the Zeal of Souls, and Contentions 
be in your Hearts, do not glory, being Lyars against the 
Truth. For this is not Wisdom descending from above, 
from the Father of Lights, but an earthly, beastly, and 
diabolical Wisdom : For where Zeal is joined with Con 
tention, there also is Inconstancy, and every naughty 
Work. But the Wisdom which is from above, is first of 
all shamefaced, then peaceable, modest, complyable, 
agreeing with good Things, full of Mercy and good 
Works, judging with Dissimulation : And the Fruit of 
Justice is sown in Peace to the Workers of Peace. $ 

These, gentle Eeader, are the Words which move 

Luther to Wrath against the Apostle : These, I say, are 

the Words whereby the Apostle as openly touches Lu- 

ther s Petulancy, Railings, wicked and contentious 

*Jas i. 26. fJas. Hi. 8. tJas. iii. 13 fol, 

De Sacr. Extremoe-Unctionis 449 

Nam ea scribit apostolus, ut plane videri possit pro- 
phetico spiritu prsenovisse Lutherum: ita virum un- 
dique pungit ad vivum. Nam quum Lutherus fidei pra> 
textu contemnat opera, Jacobus e diverso disputat, ra- 
tione, Scripturis, exemplis fidem sine operibus mortuam 
esse. Prseterea garrulam istam Lutheri petulantiam 
non uno loco verbis invadit acerrimis. "Si quis" in- 
quit, tf putat se religiosum esse, non refrenans linguam 
suam, sed seducens cor suum, hujus vana est religio" 
Accedit ad hsec quod in suam linguam Lutherus aptis- 
sime videt competere, quod illi f rendit legens : ft Lingua 
inquietum malum, plena veneno mortifero." Denique 
sentit in sua dogmata verissime dici quse de contentiosis 
hunc in modum scribit pluribus ibi verbis apostolus: 
"Quis sapiens et disciplinatus inter vos? Ostendat ex 
bona conversatione operaiionem suam in mansuetudine 
sapientice. Quod si zelum amarum habetis, et conten- 
tiones sint in cordibus vestris, nolite gloriari, et men- 
daces esse adversus veritatem. Non est enim ista sa- 
pientia desursum descendens a Patre luminum, sed 
terrena, animalis, diabolica. Ubi enim zelus et con- 
tentio, ibi inconstantia, et omne opus pravum. Quce 
autem desursum est sapientia, primum quidem pudica 
est, deinde pacifica, modesta, suadibilis, bonis consen- 
tiens, plena misericordia, et fructibus bonis, non judi- 
cans, sine simulatione. Fructus autem justitiw in pace 
seminatur facientibus pacem." 

Haec sunt, lector, quse Lutherum commovent ut ei non 
placeat apostolus. Hsec, inquam, sunt, quibus apostolus 
aperte Lutherum ac Lutheri petulantiam, maledicen- 
tiam, impia et contentiosa dogmata, non secus ac si 
vidisset virum. et verba legisset, attingit. Cujus epis- 

450 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

Opinions; even as if he had seen him, and read his 
Words. I question not but his Epistle, though never so 
much despised by Luther, will sufficiently prove to all 
Christians the Sacrament of Extreme-Unction ; nor shall 
Luther be ever so powerful, as to be able to abolish any 
Sacrament, which, for the Salvation of the Faithful, 
has been received by the Church, against which the 
Gates of Hell shall never prevail ; much less this single 
Brother, who is but a sooty Wicket of Hell. 

WE have in this little Book, courteous Reader, clearly 
demonstrated, I hope, how absurdly and impiously 
Luther has handled the Holy Sacraments : For, though 
we have not touched all Things contained in his Book ; 
yet so far as was necessary to defend the Sacraments, 
(which only was our design) I suppose I have treated, 
though not so sufficiently as might have been done, yet 
more than is even necessary ; insomuch that it behoves 
me not to insist any longer thereupon; else were it no 
hard Matter to enrich this Discourse with more plentiful 
Arguments, Laws, and Sentences of the Holy Fathers, 
and Scripture itself, if it were not in vain, upon 
Luther s Account, and for others more than necessary; 
for it is as easy for the Ethiopian to change his colour, 
or the Leopard his spots, as for Luther to be converted 
by teaching. But that others may understand how false 
and wicked his Doctrine is, lest they might be so far 
deceived as to have a good Opinion of him ; I doubt not 
but in all Parts there are very learned Men, though I 
had said Nothing at all of this Matter, who have much 
more clearly discovered the same, than can be shewn by 
me. And if there be any who desire to know this strange 
Work of his, I think I have sufficiently made it apparent 
to them. For, seeing by what has been said, it is evident 
to all Men what sacrilegious Opinions he has of the 
Sacrament of our Lord s Body, (from which the Sane- 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 451 

tolam quantumvis earn contemnat Lutherus, non dubito 
satis approbare Christianis omnibus Unctionis-Extremse 
sacramentum, nee tarn potentem fore Lutherum, ut 
ullum sacramentum possit evertere, quod in salutem 
fidelium fides recepit Ecclesise, adversus quam nee portse 
prsevalebunt inferorum, nedum fraterculus unus, in- 
ferni fuliginosum posticum. 

FECIMUS hoc libello tibi, lector, ut spero, perspicuum 
quam absurde Lutherus et impie tractarit sacrament a. 
Nam etsi non attigimus omnia, quse liber ipsius conti- 
net, tamen quod attinet ad tuenda sacramenta ipsa 
(neque enim aliud erat institutum meum) tractasse rem 
videor, si non quam multis fieri potuit, certe pluribus 
ferme quam necesse fuit, tantum abest ut oporteat im- 
morari diutius. Alioqui et rationibus, et legibus, et 
Doctorum sententiis, et Scripturis ipsis non fuisset 
difficile rem locupletare cumulatius, nisi erga et Luthe- 
rum frustra fecissemus, et erga cseteros supervacue. 

Nam si Lutherum docendo conemur immutare, citius 
et nigrorem ^Ethiops, et varietatem pardus immutabit. 
Sin aliis ostendere quam falso et quam maligne sentiat, 
ne quis ita fallatur, ut de illo sentiat bene, passim doc- 
tissimos viros esse non dubito, qui, vel tacentibus nobis, 
id multo clarius perpendant, quam ipse queam osten 
dere, et si qui sint, qui alienam in id operam desiderant, 
his abunde jam nunc opinor ostendisse me. Quum 
enim ex his quse disseruimus inclarescat omnibus, quam 
sacrilega statuat dogmata de sacramento illo quod ipsius 
Christi corpus est (e quo sacramenta reliqua quicquid 
habent sacri promanat), quis dubitare potuisset, etiamsi 
nihil adjecissem amplius, quam indignis ille modis 

452 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

tity of all the other Sacraments flows) who would have 
doubted, if I had said Nothing else, how unworthily, 
without Scruple, he treats all the rest of the Sacra 
ments ? Which, as you have seen, he has handled in 
such Sort, that he abolishes and destroys them all, except 
Baptism alone ; and that too, he has abused and deprived 
of all Grace; leaving it for no other End, than in a 
Contumely of Penance; in some, denying the Sign, in 
others, the Matter itself: Neither proves he any Thing 
in this so great a Matter; nor brings he any Thing in 
Confirmation of his Doctrine; contenting himself in 
only denying whatever the Church admits. What every 
Body believes, he alone, by his vain Reason, laughs at ; 
denouncing himself to admit Nothing, but clear and 
evident Scriptures: And these too, if alledged by any 
against him, he either evades by some private Exposi 
tion of his own, or else denies them to belong to their 
own Authors. None of the Doctors are so antient, none 
so holy, none of so great Authority in treating of Holy 
Writ : But this new Doctor, this little Saint, this Man 
of Learning; rejects with great Authority. Seeing 
therefore he despiseth all Men, and believes none, he 
ought not to take it ill, if every Body discredit him 
again. I am so far from intending to hold any further 
Dispute with him, that I almost repent myself of what 
I have already argued against him. For what avails it 
to dispute against a Man, who disagrees with every one, 
even with himself? who affirms in one Place, what he 
denies in another; denying what he presently affirms; 
who, if you object Faith, combats by Eeason; if you 
touch him with Reason, pretends Faith ; if you alledge 
Philosophers, he flies to Scripture; if you propound 
Scripture, he trifles with Sophistry ; who is ashamed of 
Nothing, fears none, and thinks himself under no Law ; 
who contemns the antient Doctors of the Church, and 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 453 

tractare csetera sacramenta non dubitet? Quse sicut 
videtis tractavit sic, ut prseter Baptismum unum, et 
ilium quoque male vexatum, et omni privatum gratia, 
nee in aliud relictum, quam in contumeliam Poeniten- 
tise, tollat prorsus, atque evertat omnia, in aliis signum 
negans, in aliis rem inficians, nee in tanta re probat 
quicquam, nee affert aliquid, quo confirmet sua, sat 
habens negare tantum quicquid recepit Ecclesia. Quic- 
quid creditur ab omnibus, ratione futili solus eludit, ac 
se denuntiat nihil admissurum prseter claras et evi- 
dentes Scripturas. Quas ipsas tamen, si quis afferat, 
vel aliquo repellit commento, vel auctoris esse, cujus 
feruntur, negat. Doctorum vero nemo tarn vetus est, 
nemo tarn sanctus, nemo tantae auctoritatis in tractatu 
sacrarum litterarum, quern non iste novus doctorculus, 
sanctulus et eruditulus magna cum auctoritate rejiciat. 

Quamobrem, quum Lutherus omnes contemnat, et 
credat nemini, debet non indignari si nemo vicissim 
credat illi. Cum quo tantum abest ut disputem pluri- 
bus, ut propemodum pigeat disputasse tarn multis. 
Quid enim prodest amplius cum illo disserere, qui 
cseteris dissentit omnibus, et non consentit sibi ? qui 
quod alibi negat, alibi dicit; quod dicit, id rursum 
negat ? Qui si fidem objicias, ratione dimicat ; si 
ratione ferias, prsetendit fidem. Si philosophos alleges, 
appellat Scripturam; si Scripturam proponas, nugatur 
sophismate. Quern neque pudet quicquam, neque timet 
quemquam, neque legein putat tenere se ullam. Qui 
veteres Ecclesia? Doctores contemnit, novos e sublirni 
deridet. Summum Ecclesiae Pontificem insectatur con- 
vitiis. Ecclesise consuetudines, dogmata, mores, leges, 

454 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

derides the new ones in the highest Degree ; loads with 
Keproaches the chief Bishop of the Church: Finally, 
he so undervalues the Customs, Doctrine, Manners, 
Laws, Decrees, and Faith of the Church ; yea, the whole 
Church itself; that he almost denies there is any such 
Thing as a Church; except perhaps such a one as him 
self makes up of two or three Heretics, of whom him 
self is Chief. Wherefore, since he is such a one, as will 
have no solid or certain Principle betwixt himself and 
his Adversary; but requires to be free in whatever 
pleases him, and as often as it pleases him lawfully to 
assert or deny; when, neither Reason, Scripture, Cus 
tom, Laws, human or divine Authority, binds him: I 
thought it not fit to dispute any longer with him, nor to 
contend, by painful Reason, against his Heresies, which 
he confirms by no Reason. But I rather advise all 
Christians, that, as the most exterminating of Plagues, 
they shun him, who endeavours to bring into the 
Church of Christ such foul Prodigies, being the very 
Doctrine of Antichrist. For, if he, who studies to move 
a Schism in any one Thing, is to be extirpated with all 
Care; with what great Endeavours is he to be rooted 
out, who, not only goes about to sew Dissention, to stir 
up the People against the chief Bishop, Children against 
their Parents, Christians against the Vicar of Christ; 
finally, who endeavours to dissolve by his Tumults, 
Brawls and Contentions, the whole Church of Christ, 
which he, in the Time of his precious Death, has bound 
together by the Bond of Charity and Love ; and also to 
destroy, prophane and pollute, with a most execrable 
Mind, filthy Tongue, and detestable Touch, what is most 
sacred therein ; who, if he did but give any Hopes of 
Cure in himself, or any Sign of Amendment, he would 
thereby move all People to regard Disposition, and to 
endeavour, by all good Means possible, to heal him, and 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 455 

decreta, fidem, Ecclesiam denique ipsam adeo floccif acit 
universam, ut nee esse fere fateatur ullam, nisi fors 
Ecclesiam illam, quam facit ipse duorum vel trium 
hsereticorum, quorum sit ipse caput. 

Quamobrem, quum sit ejusmodi, ut nihil statuat 
principii, quod certum sit ac solidum, quod ei cum dis- 
putante coiiveniat, sed sibi liberum relinqui postulet, ut 
quicquid libet, quando libet, quoties libet, id illi liceat 
et asserere vicissim, et negare : quum neque ratione sese, 
neque Scriptura, neque moribus, neque legibus, neque 
auctoritate demum vel humana, vel divina patiatur as- 
tringi, non constitui cum eo disserendum amplius, nee 
adversus eas hsereses, quse nulla ratione firmantur, 
operosa ratione pugnandum, sed admonendos potius 
Christianos omnes, ut tanquam teterrimam pestem devi- 
tent ilium, qui tarn freda portenta, ipsissima Antichristi 
dogmata, in Ecclesiam Christi conatur invehere. ISTam 
si omnimodo curandum est ut extirpetur qui de quavis 
una re schisma suscitare studuerit, quanto studio con- 
niti decet ut evellatur is qui non dissidium modo pergit 
serere, et populum in Pontificem, filios in parentem. 
Christianos in Christi vicarium provocare, totam 
denique Ecclesiam Christi, quam ille moriens amore et 
charitate colligavit, tumultu, rixis et contentione dis- 
solvere, verum etiam quicquid est in ea sacrosanctum 
exsecrabili mente, spurcissima lingua, scelerato contactu 
rescindere, temerare, polluere ? Qui si quam tamen de 
se salutis spem, si quod emendandi sui signum daret, 
hortarer omnes ut hominis sic affecti curam susciperent, 
et in hoc incumberent, ut modis quam possent optimis, 
medicarentur, et sanitati mentis restitution facerent ut 
hsereses a se propositas revocaret. Verum adhuc pro- 

456 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

to restore him to Soundness of Mind, that he might 
again revoke the Heresies he has broached. But in 
deed, as yet, I see in him all the Signs that precede 
Death: I am not so much moved to think thus, by 
Reason of his Disease, though never so mortal; as by 
his admitting no Medicine, nor of any manual Opera 
tion of the Chyrurgion : For how can he be cured, who 
will not suffer himself to be handled ? Or in what Man 
ner is he to be dealt withal; who, if you teach him, 

trifles with you ? If you advise him, is angry ? If 

you exhort him, resists ? If in any Thing you would 

appease him, is incensed ? If you resist him, is mad ? 
Otherwise, if he could be cured, what has the pious 
Vicar of Christ omitted, who, following the Example of 
a good Shepherd, would seek, find, take on his Shoul 
ders, and bring home to the Fold this lost Sheep ? But, 
alas ! the most greedy Wolf of Hell has surprized him, 
devoured and swallowed him down into the lowest Part 
of his Belly, where he lies half alive, and half dead in 
Death: And w T hilst the pious Pastor calls him, and 
bewails his Loss, he belches out of the filthy Mouth of 
the hellish Wolf these foul Inveighings, which the Ears 
of the whole Flock do detest, disdain, and abhor. 

For, first of all, being unprovoked in any Kind, he 
proposed some Articles of Indulgences; in which, (un 
der Pretence of Godliness,) he most impiously defamed 
the Chief Bishop: Afterwards, that he might under 
Pretence of Honour and Duty, cast on the Pope the 
greater Aspersion, he transmitted them to Rome, as if 
submitting himself to the Pope s Judgment ; but he aug 
mented them with Declarations, much worse than they 
were themselves ; that it might appear to all Men, that 
the Pope would not be counselled by a good and pious 
Man, but derided by a knavish little Brother, as if so 
stupid as to hold for an Honour such a Contumely, as 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 457 

fecto, qusecumque solent ad mortem esse signa, omnia 
huic esse video. Quod ut censeam non tarn morbus ejus, 
quantumvis lethalis, me movet, quam ipse: quippe qui 
medicinam nullam, nullam prorsus manum medicantis 
admittit. Quomodo enim curari potest qui se tractari 
non patitur? Aut quomodo tractari potest, quern si 
quid doces, nugatur; si quid mones, irascitur; si quid 
hortaris, obnititur; si quid placas, incenditur; si quid 
adversaris, insanit ? 

Alioquin si curari potuisset, quid omisit pientissimus 
Christi vicarius, quo pastoris sui secutus exemplum, 
ovem hanc errantem qusereret, inveniret, in humeros 
tolleret, ac reportaret in stabulum? Sed heu Lupus 
averni pessimus, anteceperat, devoraverat, atque in 
imum ventrem dimiserat, ubi semivivus adhuc in morte 
jacens, adversus inclamantem se pastorem pium, et 
perditionem ejus deplorantem, e spurco tartarei Lupi 
rictu, fcedos illos latratus eructat, quos totius gregis 
aures aversantur, abominantur, exhorrent. 

primum, nihil omnino lacessitus, articulos pro- 
posuit de Indulgentiis, quibus prsetextu pietatis impie 
traduceret summum Pontificem. Deinde, ut per honoris 
eum et officii speciem majore contumelia perfunderet, 
eos transmittit Romain, tanquam Pontificis judicio sub- 
mittens, sed auctos ante declarationibus multo quam 
essent ipsi deterioribus ; ut plane liqueret omnibus, 
Pontificem non a viro bono pioque consuli, sed a frater- 
culo nebulone rideri, tanquam ita stupidum, ut pro 
honore duceret insignem et nullius unquam exempli 
contumeliam, barbamque, quod aiunt, vellendam pra> 
beret irrisori. Si nihil mali commerebatur Pontifex, 

458 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

the like thereof had never before been heard. If the 
Pope deserved no 111, why has this degenerate Son, cast 
a false and undeserving Scandal on his Father ? But if 
any Thing had been done at Rome, which needed re 
forming; yet if Luther had been (as he would be ac 
counted) an honest Man, and zealous Christian, he 
should not have preferred his own private Glory before 
the public Good of all others, nor have desired to have 
had the Credit of a Scorner amongst the Wicked, laugh 
ing at the Nakedness of his sleeping Father,* uncover 
ing, and pointing thereto with his Finger ; but, contrary- 
wise, would have covered the same, and would have more 
secretly advised him in his own Person by Letters, fol 
lowing the Example of the Apostle, who commands us 
not to deride or reproach our Superiors, but to seek of 
them :f Which if Luther had done, I doubt not but the 
more holy Pope, (so well is his great Benignity known 
to all Men) being awakened, should have blessed his Son 
Japhet; would have rendered him Thanks for his Piety ; 
and would not have cursed him in his Anger ; who has 
f orborn to curse him when he was mocked by him ; but, 
pitying the miserable, and (more tender of a Son, than 
mindful of a Scoffer) has dealt with him by most 
honourable Men, in whose Presence he was not worthy 
to appear, that he might desist from his Iniquity: To 
which pious and wholesome Counsel, he was so far from 
obeying, that he not only derided the Legate, careful for 
his Salvation, but also immediately published another 
Book, in which he endeavoured to overthrow the Pope s 
Power : After which, he was summoned to Rome, that 
he might either render Reasons of his Writings, or re 
cant what he had inconsiderately written; having any 
Security imaginable offered him, that he should not 
undergo the Punishment which he deserved, with suffi- 
*Gen. ix. 22 fol. fl. Tim. v. 1. 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 459 

cur films degener immerentem patrem falsa conspersit 
infamia ? At si quid Romae fiebat, quod oporteret im- 
mutari, tamen si fuisset Lutherus, quod haberi volebat, 
probus, et Christiana? rei studiosus, non prseposuisset 
privatam gloriam suam publico omnium commodo, nee 
scurrandi f amam sibi venatus esset apud improbos, dor- 
mienti pudenda parentis irridens, et revelata common- 
strans digito. sed adversiis contexisset potius, et vel 
coram, vel per epistolam secretius reverenter admonuis- 
set, Apostoli praBceptum secutus, qui jubet ut ma j ores 
non rideamus, non objurgemus, sed obsecremus. Quod 
si fecisset Lutherus, baud dubito quin beatissimus Pon- 
tifex (tanta est ejus nulli non explorata benignitas) ex- 
pergefactus benedixisset filio suo Japhet, et pietatis 
retulisset gratiam, non maledixisset iratus, qui ne sic 
quidem adhuc maledixit illudenti, sed misertus miseri, 
magisque filii memor ? quam irrisoris, egit cum eo per 
viros honoratissimos, in quorum ille conspectum prodire 
non erat dignus, ut ab iniquitate desisteret. Cui tarn 
pio ac salubri consilio tantum abfuit ut paruerit, ut non 
solum deriserit legatum, de ipsius salute sollicitum, sed 
etiam novum librum ederet e vestigio, in quo Pontificis 
potestatem machinabatur evertere. Vocatus deinde 
Romam, ut vel scriptorum causam redderet, vel temere 
scripta recantaret, quavis oblata securitate non sube- 
undi supplicii quod meruerat, oblato quod in rem satis 
esset viatico, tamen, ut insignem declararet obedientis 
viri modestiam, venire contempsit fraterculus ad Ponti- 
ficem, nisi regio instructus apparatu, et bellico stipatus 
exercitu. Sed homo cautus appellavit ad generale con- 
silium, nee tamen quodlibet, sed quod proxime congre- 
garetur in Spiritu sancto, ut in quoeumque damnaretur, 
ibi negaret esse Spiritum sanctum, quern bomo sanctus 
et spiritalis misquam fatetur esse, nisi in sinu suo. 

460 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

cient Expenses offered him for his Journey: Yet, for 
all this, this silly Brother, to shew his great Modesty 
and Obedience to the Pope, refused to go, unless in the 
Equipage of a King, and guarded by a warlike Army: 
But this wary Man made his Appeal to a general 
Council ; yet not to every Council, but to such as should 
next meet in the Holy Ghost ; that in whatsoever Coun 
cil, he was condemned, he might deny the Holy Ghost 
to be present therein; for this holy and spiritual Man 
denies Him to be any where, but in his own Bosom: 
Wherefore, being oftentimes advised to repent of his 
Wickedness, the most conscientious Shepherd has at 
length been forced to cast out from the Eold the Sheep 
suffering with an incurable Disease, lest the sound Sheep 
be corrupted by Contact, and to deplore the Death of his 
son Absolom, whose Life he was unable to save, while 
he sees him hanging from a Tree by his beautiful Hair, 
of which he had stupidly grown proud.* So Luther, 
realizing himself to be cast out from the Society of the 
Faithful, began to do what the lamented Wicked Ones 
do, who, when they have fallen into Contempt, con 
temn, f He has not uttered a Groan; he has not be 
wailed his Case, in which, exalted like Lucifer, like 
Lightning he has fallen^ and wrought Damage; but 
having imitated the Despair of the Devil, himself a 
Devil too, that is having become a Calumniator, he has 
begun to rush into Blasphemies and Calumnies against 
the Pope, and, jealous of others faithful, like the old 
Serpent, to set up Nets of Infidelity, that he might get 
them to taste of the forbidden Tree of harmful Knowl 
edge and to be driven out of the Paradise of the Church 
(whence he had fallen) onto an Earth bringing forth 
Thorns and Briars. I indeed bear very ill this Man s 

*II. Ks. xviii. 9. JLu. x. 18. 

fProv. xviii. 8. Gen, iii. 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unciionis 461 

Quamobrem, iterum atque iterum admonitus ut ab 
impietate resipisceret, quum iterum atque iterum im- 
pietatem ad impietatem adjiceret, adactus est tandem 
pientissimus Pastor ovem immedicabili scabie laboran- 
tem, ne sanas attactu corrumperet, ex ovili procul 
ejicere, et filii sui Absolonis, cujus vitam servare non 
poterat, mortem deplorare, dum ab arbore pendentem 
conspicit decora caesarie, qua stulte superbierat. Luthe- 
rus ergo sentiens ejectum se e societate fidelium, facere 
coepit quod deplorati solent impii, qui quum in profun- 
dum venerint, contemnunt. Non ingemuit ; non planxit 
casum suum, quo, sicut Lucifer exalt atus, sicut fulgur 
corruerat et allisus est, sed imitatus diaboli desperatio- 
nem, diabolus etiam ipse, hoc est calumniator effectus, 
adversus Pontificem in blasphemias et calumnias cospit 
erumpere, et reliquis invidens fidelibus, velut serpens 
antiquus infidelitatis laqueos tendere, ut eos e vetito 
scientise noxise ligno gustantes, ex Ecclesise paradiso, 
unde ipse deciderat, procuraret expelli in terram germi- 
nantem spinas et tribulos. 

Ego profecto tantam hominis dementiam et miserri- 
mnm casum perquam moleste fero, cupioque ut vel 
adhuc, inspirante gratiam Deo, resipiscat tandem, con- 

462 Of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction 

great Madness, and most lamentable State, and I wish 
that even now (God inspiring him by Grace) he may 
at length come to his Senses and be converted and live. 
And I do not wish this so much for his own Sake, 
(though for his too, as I wish all to be saved, if it be 
possible) as that at length being converted, and like the 
prodigal Son* returned to the Mercy of so benign a 
Father, and having confessed his Error, he may recall 
any whom he has made err. 

But if he has sunken so deep in the Mire that now 
the Sink of Impiety and Despair shuts its Mouth upon 
him,f let him blate, blaspheme, calumniate, act as a 
Madman, so that "he that is filthy, let him be filthy 

But I beseech and entreat all other Christians, and 
through the Bowels of Christ, (Whose Faith we pro 
fess,) to turn away their Ears from the impious Words 
and not to foster Schisms and Discords, especially at 
this Time when most particularly it behooves Christians 
to be concordant against the Enemies of Christ. Do not 
listen to the Insults and Detractions against the Vicar 
of Christ which the Fury of the little Monk spews up 
against the Pope; nor contaminate Breasts sacred to 
Christ with impious Heresies, for if one sews these he 
has no Charity, swells with vain Glory, loses his Reason, 
and burns with Envy. Finally with what Feelings they 
would stand together against the Turks, against the 
Saracens, against anything Infidel anywhere, with the 
same Feelings they should stand together against this 
one little Monk weak in Strength, but in Temper more 
harmful than all Turks, all Saracens, all Infidels any 

*Lu. xv. fPs. Ixviii. JApoc. xx |i 

The End. 

De Sacr. Extremce-Unctionis 463 

vertaiurque, et vivat: nee id tarn ipsius causa cupio 
(quanquam ipsius etiam, ut qui omnes cupiam salvos, 
si possit fieri) quam ut aliquando conversus, ac, velut 
filius prodigus, reversus ad misericordiam tarn benigrd 
Patris, et errorem suum confessus, in viam revocet, si 
quos eifecit errare. Cseterum si is tarn profunde se 
demersit, ut jam super eum puteus impietatis ac 
desperationis urgeat os suum, blateret, blasphemet, 
calumnietur, insaniat, ut qui sordet, sordescat 
adhuc ! 

Cseteros vero Christianos omnes obsecro, et per Christ! 
viscera, cujus fidem profitemur, obtestor, ut ab impiis 
verbis avertant aures, neque schismata foveant et dis- 
cordias, hoc prsesertim tempore, in quo maxime opor- 
tebat adversus hostes Christi Christianos esse Concordes. 
ISTeque adversus Christi vicarium probris et detractioni- 
bus auscultent, quas in Pontincem fraterculi furor 
eructat, neque sacrata Christo pectora haeresibus impiis 
contaminent: quas si seminat, charitate vacat, gloria 
turget, ratione friget, fervet invidia. Denique, quibus 
animis adversus Turcas, adversus Saracenos, adversus 
quicquid est uspiam infidelium consisterent, iisdem 
animis consistant adversus unum istum viribus im- 
becillum; sed animo Turcis omnibus, omnibus Sara- 
cenis, omnibus usquam infidelibus nocentiorem frater- 


^Translation of flnbey 

NOTE. The references are to the pages of the Paris edition of 
1562, by Desboys ; every second or right-hand page is numbered, 
and that is " a" ; the left-hand page is not numbered, but is " b"; the 
numbers only, not the letters, are printed in the body of the work. 

Blpbabetical fnoea; to tbe " Defence of tbe 
Seven Sacraments" 

Ambrose ordered married people to live continently 

during Lent, 48 b. 

When the Apostles were ordained priests, 80 a. 
Worthless Calling of Luther to the council, 100 a. 
Occasion of mixing Water in the chalice, 32 a. 
Shrewd interpretation of Luther, 18 b. 
Arrogance of Luther, 51 b. 
Argument from Christ s promise valid against Luther, 

27 a. 

Attrition greatly displeases Luther, 50 a. 
Author s object, 96 b. 


Open Calumny of Luther, 58 a. 

Triple Captivity of Luther exploded, 26 b. 

Reason of reserved Cases, 54 b. 

In which sacraments a Character is imprinted, 68 b. 

Circumstances of sins to be confessed, 56 b. 

Luther condemns Celibacy of priests, 77 a. 

Lord s Supper told of, 30 b. 

Elegant and convincing Comparison of the sacrament, 

19 a. 
Beautiful Figure, 45 a. 

B00ectfoni0 Septcm Sacramentorum fn&ej Blpbabeticua 

Ambrosius conjuges ab amplexibus in quadragesima 

jussit abstinere, 48 b. 

Apostoli quando ordinati sint sacerdotes, 80 a. 
Appellatio Lutheri ad concilium friuola, 100 a. 
Aquse miscendse in calice, occasio, 32 a. 
Argutula Lutheri interpretatio, 18 b. 
Arrogantia Lutheri, 51 b. 
Argumentum validum ex Christi promissione contra 

Lutherum, 27 a. 

Attritio nimium displicet Luthero, 50 a. 
Authoris institutura, 96 b. 


Calumnia aperta Lutheri, 58 a. 

Captivitas Lutheri trina excutitur, 26 b. 

Casuum reservandorum ratio, 54 b. 

Character in quibus sacramentis imprimatur, 68 b. 

Circumstantise peccatorum confitendse, 56 b. 

Coelibatum Sacerdotum damnat Lutherus, 77 a. 

Coena Dominica expensa, 30 b. 

Comparatio elegans et efficax de Sacramento, 

19 a. 
Comparatio pulchra, 45 a. 

466 Translation of Index 

Luther s false Figure of fire and iron, 25 a. 
Strong confirmation of auricular Confession, 53 b. 
Consideration of the sacrament of Confirmation, 61 a 

and fol. 

Confusion of Luther, 54 a. 
That the sacrament of Marriage existed among all races, 

65 b. 
Better causes of Contrition than those which Luther 

offers, 51 b. 
The Church is to be Believed about the institution of 

the sacraments, 61 b. 


Explanation of the substantial words of the sacrament 

of the altar against Luther, 19 b. 
That God takes an interest in our works, 59 b. 
If one may believe Luther, Dionysius is nothing to 

Luther, 63 a. 


The Church takes precedence of all the evangelists, 

65 a. 
The Church has to discern the word of God from the 

words of men, 78 b. 
The faith of the Church is preserved in traditions, 

62 a. 
Why Bishops alone impose their hands on the baptized 

that they may receive the Holy Ghost, 64 a. 
The Exitus of the faithful from Luther, 26 a. 
Exorcisms in the Church, 46 a. 
Consideration of Extreme Unction, 89 a. 

Why the marriage of the Faithful is a sacrament rather 

than that of infidels, 66 a. 
Faith is supported by reason and scripture, 47 a. 

Index Alphabeticus 467 

Comparatio Luther i de ferro et igne elusa, 25 a. 
Confessionis clancularise solida confirmatio, 53 b. 
Confirmationis sacrament! consideratio, 61 a et 


Confusio Lutherana, 54 a. 
Conjugii sacramentum fuisse apud omnes gentes, 

65 b. 
Contritionis justiores causa?, quam quas Lutherus affert, 

51 b. 
Credendum est ecclesia? in Sacramentorum institutione, 

61 b. 


Declaratis verborum substantialium sacramenti altaris 

contra Lutherum, 19 b. 
Deum curare opera nostra, 59 b. 
Dionysius nihil ad Lutherum, si Luthero credas, 63 a. 


Ecclesia omnibus evangelistis praposita, 65 a. 

Ecclesia habet discernere verum Dei verbis hominum, 

78 b. 
Ecclesiae fides intraditionibus valet, 62 a. 

cur Episcopi soli baptizatis manus imponunt ut accipi- 

ant spiritum sanctum, 64 a. 
Exitus Luthero credentium, 26 a. 
Exorcism! in ecclesia, 46 a. 
Extreme Unctionis consideratio, 89 a. 

Fidelium conjugium cur potius fit sacramentum, quam 

infidelium, 66 a. 
Fides et ratione et scripturis suffulta, 47 a. 

468 Translation of Index 


Greece obeys the Roman Pontiff, 9 b. 
That Grace is infused in the sacrament of Matrimony, 
71 b; so too in the sacrament of Orders, 81 b, 88 b. 


Most all Heretics rest on scripture, 79 b. 

Helvidius, 62 a, 64 b. 

Jerome for the character, 68 a. 

How much Jerome defers to the Roman See, 9 b. 

Hugh of St. Victor, 44 b, 62 b. 

The Epistle of James is defended by the authority of 
Jerome, 90 b. 

The Epistle of James, how weighty and sacred, and 
worthy of the apostolic spirit, 95 b. 

The same can be taken and offered, 37 a. 

Impudence is Luther s one reason for proving every 
thing, 106 a. 

Little Children were formerly admitted to Communion, 
14 b. 


Laymen are the Lutheran priests, 86 a. 

Leo the Tenth, 6 a. 

The Liberty of Luther worse than the Egyptian bond 
age, 16 b. 

The Liberty of those going over from the Church of 
Christ to Luther, 42 a. 

Luther fights against his mother, 3 b. 

Luther is to be cautiously read, 4 b. 

Luther contradicts himself, 6 a, 8 a, 13 a, b. 

Index Alphabeticus 469 


Grsecia Romano paret pontifici, 9 b. 
Gratiam in sacramento matrimonii infundi, 71 b; item 
in sacramento ordinis, 81 b, 88 b. 


Hsereticos plerosque omnes scripturis niti, 7" 9 b. 
Helvidius, 62 a, 64 b. 
Hieronymus pro charactere, 68 a. 
Hieronymus quantum Romanse sedi deferat, 9 b. 
Hugo de Sancto Victore, 44 b, 62 b. 


Jacobi epistola asseritur authore Hieronymo, 90 b. 

Jacobi epistola quam gravis ac sancta, apostolicoque 

spiritu digna, 95 b. 
Idem potest sumi et offerri, 3Y a. 
Impudentia unica ratio est Luthero probandi omnia, 

106 a. 
Infantes olim ad communionem admittebantur, 14 b. 

Laici sacerdotes Lutheriani, 86 a. 

Leo decimus, 6 a. 

Libertas Lutheri, ^Egyptiaca servitute delerior, 16 b. 

Libertas transfugientium ab ecclesia Christi ad Lu- 

tberum, 42 a. 

Lutherus matrem oppugnat, 3 b. 
Lutherus caute legendus, 4 b. 
Lutherus sibi ipsi contrarius, 6 a, 8 a, 13 a, b. 

470 Translation of Index 

Luther consigns his books to the fire, 8 a. 

Luther lately detested the Bohemians, 8 b. 

Luther works and teaches against, ibid. 

Luther admits only one sacrament, 11 a. 

Luther is to be avoided as an adder, 11 b. 

Whither Luther is going, 11 b, 12 b. 

Luther thinks of a flight to the Bohemians, 16 a. 

Luther corrupts the testament of Christ, 30 a. 

Luther the new Esdras, 34 a. 

Luther singular in either doctrine or stupidity, 39 a. 

Luther Atlas, 40 a. 

Luther drives the people away from Mass, 40 b. 

Luther allows Christians the worst license, 47 b. 

Luther is caught everywhere, 50 b. 

Luther in a labyrinth, 51 a. 

Luther mixes up everything, 54 a. 

Luther prodigal of words, 57 b. 

Luther ridiculously ridicules the Church, 69 a. 

Luther convicted by his own words, 79 a. 

Why Luther is mad with Dionysius, 83 b. 

Luther pierced by his own shaft about the Epistle of 
James, 91 a. 

Luther the destroyer of both bodies and souls, 95 a. 

Luther writes things worthy of the apostolic spirit, 95 b. 

Why Luther is so enraged at the Epistle of James, 95 b. 

Luther relinquishes Baptism to the damage of Penance, 
97 a. 

Luther in dispute how he is, 97 a. 

Luther the new little doctor, little saint, and little know- 
it-all, 97 b. 

Luther or a pest to be avoided, 98 b. 

Luther Proteus, 97 b. 

Luther incurable, 98 b. 

Where Luther is going, 99 a. 

Luther the wicked, 111 a. 

Index Alphabeticus 471 

Lutherus libros suos devovet igni, 8 a. 

Lutherus nuper Bohemos detestabatur, 8 b. 

Lutherus contra facit ac docet, ibidem. 

Lutherus unum tantum sacramentum admittit, 11 a. 

Lutherus ut coluber vitandus, 11 b. 

Lutherus quo tendat, 11 b, 12 b. 

Lutherus fugam meditatur ad Bohemos, 16 a. 

Lutherus adulterat Christ! testamentum, 30 a. 

Lutherus novus Esdras, 34 a. 

Lutherus vel doctrina vel stultitia singularis, 39 a. 

Lutherus Atlas, 40 a. 

Lutherus populum a missa abigit, 40 b. 

Lutherus Christianis summani decernit licentiam, 47 b. 

Lutherus undequaque constrictus, 50 b. 

Lutherus in labyrintho, 51 a. 

Lutherus omnia confundit, 54 a. 

Lutherus verborum prodigus, 57 b. 

Lutherus ridicule ridet ecclesiarn, 69 a. 

Lutherus suis ipsius verbis victus, 79 a. 

Lutherus cur irascatur Dionysio, 83 b. 

Lutherus suo telo confossus de epistola Jacobi, 

91 a. 

Lutherus et corporum et animorum occisor, 95 a. 
Lutherus apostatico spiritu digna scribit, 95 b. 
Lutherus cur tarn infensus epistolse Jacobi, 95 b. 
Lutherus reliquit baptismum in contumeliam pceniten- 

tise, 97 a. 

Lutherus qualis in disputando, 97 a. 
Lutherus novus doctorculus, sanctulus et eruditulus, 

97 b. 

Lutherus ceu pestis vetandus, 98 b. 
Lutherus Proteus, 97 b. 
Lutherus immedicabilis, 98 b. 
Lutherus qua via grassatur, 99 a. 
Lutherus malitiosus ; 111 a. 

472 Translation of Index 

Luther s pride, 4 b. 

Luther s untruthfulness, 5 b. 

Luther s view-points, 8 b. 

Luther s contumelious words against all the clergy, 15 a. 

Luther s deceit discovered, 16 a. 

Luther s great pity, IT a. 

Luther s argument from the article turned against him, 

19 b. 

Luther s frivolous cunning parried, 19 b. 
Luther s facetious deception, 22 a. 
Luther s position overthrown, 35 a. 
Luther s crass ignorance, 37 a. 
Luther s regular way, 42 b, 61 a. 
Luther s strategy, how it differs from Paul s simplicity, 

48 b. 

Luther s way to propose familiar things as if new, 

49 a. 

Luther s spirit which warns him of hidden things, 57 b. 

Luther s inconstancy, 60 a ; quibbling, 61 a. 

Luther a reed-cane, 65 a. 

Luther s new dogmas, 76 b. 

Luther s great impudence, 76 a. 

Luther s church the church of malefactors, 78 a. 

Luther s contumely against St. Dionysius, 82 b. 

Lutheran priests laymen, 86 a. 

Luther s madness, 88 b. 

Luther s faith, 94 b; earnestness, 98 b. 

With Luther the papal Church is one, Christ s another, 

77 a. 
Lutheran unction makes men immortal, 94 b. 


The Method of Luther exposed, 76 a. 

The example of M. ^Emilius Scaurus, 55 b. 

Consideration of Matrimony, 64 b. 

Index Alphabeticus 473 

Lutheri superbia, 4b. 

Lutheri fictio, 5 b. 

Lutheri conspicilia, 8 b. 

Lutheri verba contumeliosa in totum clerum, 15 a. 

Lutheri dolus deprehensus, 16 a. 

Lutheri insignis misericordia, 17 a. 

Lutheri argumentum de articulo retortum, 19 b. 

Lutheri nugax argutia eluditur, 19 b. 

Lutheri faceta illusio, 22 a. 

Lutheri prsecipuum fundamentum subversum, 35 a. 

Lutheri insignis inscitia, 37 a. 

Lutheri mos perpetuus, 42 b, 61 a. 

Lutheri techna quam discidet a simplicitate Pauli, 

48 b. 
Lutheri mos notissima ceu ignota proponere, 49 a. 

Lutheri spiritus, qui ilium secretorum admoneat, 57 b. 

Lutheri inconstantia, 60 a ; nugacitas, 61 a. 

Lutherus baculus arundineus, 65 a. 

Lutheri nova dogmata, 76 b. 

Lutheri insignis impudentia, 76 a. 

Lutheri ecclesia, ecclesia malignantium, 78 a. 

Lutheri contumelia in b. Dionysium, 82 b. 

Lutherani sacerdotes laici, 86 a. 

Lutheri delirium, 88 b. 

Lutheri fides, 94 b; studium, 98 b. 

Luthero alia est papalis ecclesia, alia Christi, 

77 a. 
Lutheriana unctio homines reddit immortales, 94 b. 


Machina Lutheri deprehensa, 76 a. 
M. zEmilii Scauri exemplum, 55 b. 
Matrimonii consideratio, 64 b. 

474 Translation of Index 

The sacrament of Matrimony proven from the words of 

Paul, 67 a. 
Those whom Luther condemns are illustrious for 

Miracles, 13 b. 

The Mass is a sacrifice, 33 b. 
The Mass represents the passion, not to say the supper, 

35 b. 

Excellence of the Mass, 39 b. 
Luther calumniates the Mass, 29 a. 
The Modesty of the little monk Luther, 10 b. 
Women are full of defects, 56 a. 
Luther lets Women hear confessions, 55 a. 

A Mystery is easily turned into a sacrament, 69 b. 

Nobody knows that he is sufficiently contrite, 50 b. 


Every sacrament is a mystery, 69 b. 
God has a care for our works, 59 b. 
Consideration of the sacrament of Orders, 76 a. 
The sacrament of Orders not to be repeated, 85 a. 
Luther profanes the sacrament of Orders, 88 a. 

Luther calls the Eucharist a sacrament of Bread, 


The vastness of the Papacy, 9 a ; its antiquity, ibid. 
The express words of Paul about Matrimony, 67 a. 
Reservations of Sins to bishops and popes, 54 b. 
Petitions of Luther in disputing, 98 a. 
Luther s Bad reason, 86 a. 

Index Alphdbeticus 475 

Matrimonii sacr amentum ex Pauli verbis assertum, 

67 a. 
Miraculis elarent, quos Lutherus damnat, 13 b. 

Missa sacrificium est, 33 b. 

Missa passionem representat, nedum coenam, 35 b. 

Missas excellentia, 39 b. 

Missam calumniatur Lutherus, 29 a. 

Modestia fraterculi Lutheri, 10 b. 

Mulieres rimarum plense sunt, 56 a. 

Mulieribus Lutherus permittit confessiones audire, 

55 a. 
Mysterium bene vertitur in sacr amentum, 69 b. 

Nemo scit se satis esse contritum, 50 b. 


Omne sacramentum est mysterium, 69 b. 
Opera nostra deo curas sunt, 59 b. 
Ordinis sacramenti consideratio, 76 a. 
Ordinis sacramentum non esse iterandum, 85 a. 
Ordinis sacramentum profanat Lutherus, 88 a. 


Panis sacramentum, Eucharistiam vocat Lutherus, 


Papatus amplitude, 9 a ; antiquitas, ibidem. 
Pauli verba de matrimonio expensa, 67 a. 
Peccatorum reservationes episcopis et papis, 54 b. 
Petitiones Lutheri in disputando, 98 a. 
Plumbea Lutheri ratio, 86 a. 

476 Translation of Index 

Penance a second plank, 43 b. 

Lutheran Preparation for the Eucharist, 41 a. 

The confidence of the Probity of ^Emilius Scaurus, 

55 b. 
The Promises of the sacrifices of the Old Testament, 

34 b. 
Luther on Purgatory, 7 a. 


Some things are to be Received which are not written, 

61 b. 
The right of Divorce denied married people by Christ 

Himself, 74 a. 
A King is nobody to Luther, because all are kings with 

him, 86 b. 
Authority of the See of Eome, 9 b. 


Luther condemns the celibacy of priests, 77 a. 

Priests are made only by bishops, 88 b. 

The definition of a Sacrament according to Luther, 

27 b. 
The Sacrament of Marriage has existed among all races, 

65 b. 

Two opinions on the power of the Sacraments, 45 a. 
How Luther treats the Sacraments, 44 b. 
The Sacrifices of the Old Law were taken by the priests, 

37 a. 

Satisfaction is necessary to Penitents, 60 a. 
Consideration of Satisfaction, 5 b. 
The Holy Spirit withdraws from the deceitful, 5 b. 

Index Alpliabeticus 477 

Poenitentia, secunda tabula, 43 b. 

Pneparatio Lutheriana ad Eucharistiam, 41 a. 

Probitatis confidentia ^Einilii Scauri, 55 b. 

Promissiones sacrificiorum veteris testament!, 

34 b. 
de Purgatorio Lutherus, 7 a. 


Kecipienda esse qusedam quse non sunt scripta, 

61 b. 
Repudii jus ademptum conjugibus ab ipso Christo, 

74 a. 
Rex nemo est Luthero, quia illi omnes reges, 

86 b. 
Romanes sedis auctoritas, 9 b. 


Sacerdotum coelibatum damnat Lutherus, 77 a. 
Sacerdotes non nisi ab episcopis fieri, 88 b. 
Sacramenti definitio secundum Lutherum, 27 b. 

Sacramenturn conjugii fuisse apud omnes gentes, 

65 b. 

de Sacramentorum potestate duse opiniones, 45 a. 
Sacramentis quam tribuat Lutherus, 44 b. 
Sacrificia veteris legis a sacerdotibus sumebantur, 

37 a. 

Satisfactio necessaria est poenitentibus, 60 a. 
Satisfactionis consideratio, 57 b. 
Spiritus Sanctus effugit fictum, 5 b. 

4Y8 Translation of Index 


The Times prescribed by Luther for the people to com 
municate, 41 b. 

Traditions also to be received, 61 b and fol. 
How old the name of Transsubstantiation, 22 b. 

Too great trust in the people of obtaining Pardon, 49 b. 
Extreme Unction not to be given in every sickness, 93 a. 
"You are a royal priesthood" : how it should be under 
stood, 86 a. 
Votaries, 47 b. 

The End. 

Index Alphabeticus 479 


Tempora plebi ad communicandum a Luthero statuta, 

41 b. 

Traditiones etiam esse recipiendas, 61 b et dein. 
Transsubstantiationis nomen quam vetus, 22 b. 

Venise consequenda? fiducia nimia in populo, 49 b. 
Unctio extrema non in quo vis morbo danda, 93 a. 
Vos estis regale sacerdotium, ut intelligatur, 

86 a. 
Vovista3, Votarii, 47 b. 





BQX 2059 ,A2 04 SMC 

Asssrtio septern 

Henry VIII